The URL can be used to link to this page

2019-07-16 Council PKT - Regular CITY OF �. Federal Way Centered on Opportunity CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Council Chambers - City Hall July 16, 2019 - 6:30 p.m. 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. MAYOR'S KEY TO THE CITY- Mike Park The City Council will take a brief recess for a reception to honor Mr. Mike Park 4. PRESENTATIONS a. South King County Communities Fund — Port Commissioner Fred Felleman & Environmental Engagement Program Manager Andy Gregory b. 2020 Census Partnership — Taylor Hoang, Census Bureau Partnership Specialist c. Streets Update — Deputy Public Works Director Desiree Winkler d. Fireworks Enforcement Report— Deputy Chief Kyle Sumpter e. Certificate of Appointment— Ethics Board ...page 4 f. Mayor's Emerging Issues and Report • Recent Community Events: Red, White and Blues Festival (7/4); Virtual Town Hall— Facebook Live (7/11); 4t Annual Veterans Center BBQ (7/12) • Upcoming Events: Federal Way Rhythm & Brews Festival at Town Square Park on July 20 at 12:00 noon; 63 d Annual Kiwanis Salmon Bake at Steel Lake Park on July 26 4:00 p.m.; Flavor of Federal Way at Town Square Park on August 10 g. Council Committee Reports • Finance, Economic Development Regional Affairs Committee (FEDRAC) • Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) • Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC) • Parks/Recreation/Human Services/Public Safety Committee (PRHSPS) • Regional Committees Report(PIC) • Deputy Mayor Report The City Council may add items and take action on items not listed on the agenda. City Council Meetings are wheelchair accessible; and assisted listening devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk. Regular Meetings are recorded and televised live on Government Access Channel 21. To view Council Meetings online please visit www.cityoffederalway.com. 5. CITIZEN COMMENT PLEASE COMPLETE A PINK SLIP AND TURN IT IN TO THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO SPEAKING. When recognized by the Mayor, come forward to the podium and state your name for the record. Please limit your comments to three minutes. The Mayor may interrupt comments that exceed three minutes, relate negatively to other individuals, or are otherwise inappropriate. 6. CONSENT AGENDA Items listed below have been previously reviewed in their entirety by a Council Committee of three members and brought before full Council for approval;all items are enacted by one motion. Individual items maybe removed by a Councilmember for separate discussion and subsequent motion. a. Minutes: July 2, 2019 Regular and Special Meeting Minutes ...page 5 b. Authorization to Submit Proposal for King County Council Allocated WaterWorks Funding for the Storm Drain Artwalk Project ...page 18 c. 2019 Storm Pipe Repair Phase II — 85% Design Report Status and Authorization to Bid ...page 21 d. South 348th Street Entrance Sign — 30% Design Report ...page 24 e. 2019 Overlay Project Change Order and Contingency Reset ...page 26 f. 2020 Asphalt Overlay Program — Preliminary Project List and Authorization to Bid ...page 28 g. Adaptive Traffic Signal Control System Phases I & II Procurement ...page 38 h. Authorization to Apply for Transportation Grant ...page 86 i. Solid Waste Collection Services — Contract Award (Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Collection) ...page 88 j. Saghalie Soccer Field Synthetic Turf Replacement ...page 187 k. Federal Way Soccer Association Donation for Field Turf Replacement at Saghalie ...page 190 I. Jail Services Contract— Kent City Jail ...page 192 m. WA State Department of Corrections Master Agreement— Class V Community Restitution Programs ...page 204 7. PUBLIC HEARING a. Reforming the North Lake Management District (NLMD) Number 2 ...page 212 • Staff Report: Leah Myhre, SWM Water Quality Coordinator • Citizen Comment • Council Comments/Questions • Resolution 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS a. Authorization to Apply for Department of Ecology Water Quality Capacity Grant ...page 694 b. Authorization to Apply for and Accept Department of Ecology Waste Reduction and The City Council may add items and take action on items not listed on the agenda. City Council Meetings are wheelchair accessible; and assisted listening devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk. Regular Meetings are recorded and televised live on Government Access Channel 21. To view Council Meetings online please visit www.cityoffederalway.com. Recycling Education Grant ...page 696 c. Resolution: Appointment Pro and Con Committee Members for Advisory Proposition No. 1 regarding Marijuana Related Businesses in the City ...page 699 d. Resolution: Authorizing the placement of Initiative #19-001 Concerning Rental Requirements for Landlords and Rental Rights for Tenants on the November 5, 2019 General Election Contingent on Certification of Sufficiency from King County Elections ...page 704 e. Resolution: Directing the City Clerk to Advertise for Pro and Con Committee Members for the November 5, 2019 General Election regarding the Citizen Initiative #19-001 and Setting a Date of July 30, 2019 to Make Committee Appointments ...page 709 f. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement ...page 713 g. Resolution: Approve Placing a Countywide Emergency Medical Services Levy Proposal on the November 5, 2019 Ballot ...page 745 h. Arts Commission Appointment (Alternate to Voting) ...page 768 9. ORDINANCES First Reading a. Council Bill #763 Relating to the Imposition of an Excise Tax on Business Activities ...page 769 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO AN INCREASE OF THE EXCISE TAX UPON EVERYONE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF COLLECTING SOLID WASTE WITHIN FEDERAL WAY AND EXPANDING THE DEFINITION OF "SOLID WASTE"; AND AMENDING FWRC 3.10.020 AND 3.10.040. (AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 18-847, 10-669,09-600, 07-562, 06-539, 02-431, 96-276, 96-262, AND 95-257) • Staff Report— EJ Walsh, Public Works Director • Citizen Comment— 3 minutes • Council Questions 10. COUNCIL REPORTS 11. EXECUTIVE SESSION • Potential Litigation pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) • Collective Bargaining pursuant to RCW 42.30.140(4) 12. ADJOURNMENT The City Council may add items and take action on items not listed on the agenda. City Council Meetings are wheelchair accessible; and assisted listening devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk. Regular Meetings are recorded and televised live on Government Access Channel 21. To view Council Meetings online please visit www.cityoffederalway.com. Ora 0i rAt MA M w Pi PO 0 1 W-m W Met VA No-ry 4 ru M t x U." V I 0.4 • . .� y toil r k • • i I .7 rd 4 MIS � r a rde • a COUNCIL MEETING D.................ATE:.................July..................16,,2019 ... ITEM #: 6a- ------ .....- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council approve the draft minutes for the July 2, 2019 Regular and Special City Council Meetings? COMMITTEE: N/A MEETING DATE: N/A CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Stephanie Courtney, City Clerk DEPT: Mayor's Office Attachments: Draft minutes for the July 2, 2019 Regular and Special Meetings Options Considered: 1. Approve the minutes as presented. 2. Amend the minutes as necessary. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: N/A MAYOR APPROVAL: N/A N/A CITY CLERK APPROVAL: Committee Council Initiull ate Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:N/A N/A N/A N/A Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member MEMO PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: `I rrm/,I,e approval of the inintites as presented. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED IST reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances onh) ORDINANCE# REVISED— 12/2016 RESOLUTION# CITY OF .. Federal Wa CITY COUNCIL 4F1 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES Council Chambers - City Hall 1)rt July 2, 2019 — 5:00 p.m. 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Ferrell called the meeting to order at 5:04 p.m City officials in attendance: Mayor Jim Ferrell, Deputy Mayor Susan Honda, Councilmember Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Councilmember Jesse Johnson, Councilmember Hoang Tran,Councilmember Mark Koppang, Councilmember Martin Moore, and Councilmember Dini Duclos. City staff in attendance: City Attorney Ryan Call and City Clerk Stephanie Courtney. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ferrell led the flag salute. 3. STUDY SESSION a. 2020-2024 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)/ HOME Consolidated Plan Community Services Manager Sarah Bridgeford introduced this item noting the representative from King Council was running late and would join the meeting shortly. She explained Auburn, Bellevue, Kent, and Federal Way partner with King County. HOME (Home Investment Partnerships Program) funds are largely focused on housing while CDBG funds have a broader focus on community development activities. In lieu of Ms. Kendall, Ms. Bridgeford began to brief the Council on the King County and Partner Cities Consolidated Plan 2020-2024 and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. She noted the Consolidated Plan is a 5-year plan to assess needs and goals for affordable housing, homelessness, and community and economic development. This plan also sets priorities for approximately$9 million dollars in annual funding from HUD to the following programs: • Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) • HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) Program, and • Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) King County and the partner cities use the funding for a variety of purposes including affordable housing, housing repair for low-income homeowners and renters, homelessness prevention, investments in infrastructure and training assistance for small business owners. Ms. Bridgeford welcomed Ms. Valerie Kendall who presented information on Fair Housing Analysis Federal Way City Council Special Minutes Page I of 3 July 2, 2019 and key findings. Communities of color within the racial categories are more likely to be severely cost burdened. She explained fair housing requires all local governments to strive to ensure all people have fair access to housing. They are conducting a 5-year study analyzing impediments to fair housing choice. She overviewed protected classes as well a cost burdens within racial categories. She reviewed the analysis of impediments to fair housing choice goals which may come back to Council at a later date for action. The current draft goals include: 1. Invest in programs that provide education and enforcement of fair housing laws. 2. Engage underrepresented communities in ongoing efforts to understand barriers and increase access to opportunity. 3. Provide more housing for vulnerable populations. 4. Provide more housing choices for people with large families. 5. Support efforts to increase housing stability. 6. Preserve and increase affordable housing in communities at high risk of displacement. 7. Review zoning laws to increase density in urban areas. 8. Work with communities to engage in community revitalization efforts. 9. Support the Affordable Housing Committee's efforts to promote fair housing. Ms. Kendall noted they have taken community input and are still seeking input through surveys and direct email feedback. She reviewed the timeline and next steps. Ms. Bridgeford also presented a report on the Federal Way 2020-2024 CDBG Consolidated Plan. She noted since two of the three national objectives are not applicable to Federal Way(aid in prevention and elimination of slum and blight and meet a need having particular urgency/natural disaster), the objective is to benefit low-to moderate-income individuals. CDBG Goals are to (1) ensure decent affordable housing; (2) provide a suitable living environment; and (3) create economic opportunities. Ms. Bridgeford noted additional projects are in progress or will complete in 2019, however the accomplishments to date which include: 0 40 homes repaired • 1,393 persons received public services • 231 businesses were assisted • One domestic violence shelter had critical repairs for security O Two homeowner occupied homes were acquired as affordable housing • One home was added as an adult family home for individuals with disabilities • The Performing Arts and Eventer Center in 2017 She highlighted demographic information and an overview of a community survey where job creation was highest ranked for economic development. Strategic Plan Goals are to create economic opportunities; affordable housing and homelessness and self-sufficiency and basic needs. Ms. Bridgeford identified the Consolidated Plan Timeline and next steps. Council thanked both Ms. Bridgeford and Ms. Kendall for the combined presentation and asked questions regarding the racial categories provided on the Cost Burden slide. Ms. Kendall and Ms. Bridgeford clarified that these are pre-established categories and were not selected by King County or the City of Federal Way. 4. CITIZEN COMMENT No citizen comment as received. Federal Way City Council Special Minutes Page 2 of 3 July 2, 2019 5. EXECUTIVE SESSION At 5:55 p.m. Mayor Ferrell recessed into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing potential litigation pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(i); anticipated time was 30 minutes. ® Potential Litigation pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) 6. ADJOURNMENT There being nothing further on the agenda; the Special Meeting was adjourned at 6:22 p.m. Attest: Stephanie Courtney City Clerk Approved by Council: Federal Way City Council Special Minutes Page 3 of 3 July 2, 2019 CITY OF .. Federal Way CITY COUNCIL 80% FIAFT REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 10 Council Chambers - City Hall July 2, 2019 — 6:30 p.m. 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Ferrell called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. City officials in attendance: Mayor Jim Ferrell, Deputy Mayor Susan Honda, Councilmember Lydia Assefa-Dawson,Councilmember Jesse Johnson,Councilmember Hoang Tran, Councilmember Mark Koppang, Councilmember Martin Moore, and Councilmember Dini Duclos. City staff in attendance: City Attorney Ryan Call and City Clerk Stephanie Courtney. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ferrell led the flag salute. 3. PRESENTATIONS a. Police Department Swearing-in Ceremonies Chief of Police Andy Hwang introduced new Officer Lisle and announced the promotion of Corporal Hinckle. Mayor Ferrell administered the oaths of office and congratulated the officers. b. King County Public Health Recognizing Police Officers for Life-Saving Measures of Officer Brian Bassage and Officer Michael Sant Mayor Ferrell introduced Laura Miccile, CPR/PAD Program Manager for Public Health — Seattle and King County and patient Mr. Norman Stone. Ms. Miccile reported King County Public Health provides grant funding for purchasing AEDs(Automated External Defibrillator). AED's are installed in police cars due to increased survival rate when used along with early CPR. On April 10, officers responded to a 911 call received by ValleyCom and used the AED on Mr. Stone. Mr. Stone's life was saved as a result of the AED and the quick response by the officers. Mr. Stone sincerely thanked the officers for their assistance and shared his story of survival. Councilmembers asked how many cars are equipped with the AED. Lieutenant Raymond Bunk reported there are eighteen patrol cars currently equipped; five more in process. Federal Way City Council Regular Minutes Page 1 of 9 July S, 2019 c. Police Department Fireworks Enforcement Briefing Deputy Chief Kyle Sumpter reminded the audience all fireworks are illegal in Federal Way due to noise; air and ground pollution; injuries; and fires. He indicated officers would rather see voluntary compliance, but will impose the $300 fine when needed. He encouraged Home Owners Associations and Multi-Family Properties to establish rules that ban fireworks and establish penalties when violated. Councilmembers thanked Deputy Sumpter for his presentation and asked questions regarding increased patrols in areas that have been problematic during previous years. d. City's Obligations Update Finance Director Ade Ariwoola updated Council on the city's current financial obligations including the SCORE bond, Target 2017 Go Bond, 2013 Community Center Bond, and Section 108 Bond. He also highlighted other debts including the PAEC Construction Interfund Loan, PAEC Operations Interfund Loan, LED Street Light Interfund Loan, and CDBG Operations Interfund Loan. Council thanked Mr. Ariwoola for the presentation and asked questions regarding the possibility of potential recession. Mr. Ariwoola overviewed the potential impact if a recession were to occur. e. Certificates of Appointment Diversity Commission Councilmember Johnson acknowledged Certificates of Appointment to the Diversity Commission for Trenise Rogers and Nichelle Curtis-McQueen. f. Certificate of Appointment Ethics Board Deputy Mayor Honda acknowledged the Appointment of Kathryn Hancock to the Ethics Board. g. Mayor's Emerging Issues and Report • Red, White and Blues Festival Mayor Ferrell reported the Red, White and Blues 4th of July Festival at Celebration Park begins at 4:00 p.m. with the fireworks starting around 10:15 p.m. Parks Director John Hutton noted the various bands and live entertainment playing at this annual family friendly free event. This year they are including remote speakers in the parking lots outside the festival which will enable more people will be able to enjoy the music. ® Recent Community Events Mayor Ferrell recently attended the South King County Scholar Athlete Breakfast at the Performing Arts and Event Center (PAEC) on June 29; and the Korean American National Sports Festival which was held June 21 through 23 held at Memorial Stadium. He noted a delegation of South Korean congressional leaders were present for this event. • Upcoming Events Mayor Ferrell noted upcoming events including Miles for Miso 5K on July 4 starting at 8:30 a.m. at the Federal Way Community Center; North Lake Improvement Center Annual Parade Federal Way City Council Regular Minutes Page 2 of 9 July S, 2019 on July 4 beginning at 10:30 a.m.; 4th Annual Federal Way Veterans Center BBQ and Open House on July 12 at noon; and the Federal Way Kiwanis 63rd Annual Salmon Bake at Steel Lake Park on July 26 at 4:00 p.m. h. Council Committee Reports Finance, Economic Development Regional Affairs Committee (FEDRAC) — Chair Duclos reported the last meeting was brief but approved the retainage release on the PAEC signage. The Financial Obligation report was provided at their meeting and she requested Mr.Ariwoola also present to the full Council tonight. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) — Chair Moore announced the committee will not meet in July as city staff is working on tourism grant deadlines. He overviewed events occurring with Federal Way Little League and the Annual Desna Cup in August at Saghalie Park. Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC) —Chair Koppang reported on a good meeting discussing roads and zoning. Discussion included seeking grant money for Stormwater Drain artwork and planning for a city entrance sign on South 348th Street. He shared the committee accepted the contract awarded for Waste Management which will be before Council on July 16 for consideration. Parks/Recreation/Human Services/Public Safety Committee (PRHSPS) — Chair Johnson noted next meeting is Tuesday, July 9. He indicated the August meeting is canceled due to National Night Out and the rescheduling and cancellation of Council Meetings. He indicated Chief Hwang will provide a report on crime reduction efforts and crime reports, and the prioritization of violence prevention recommendations will be discussed. Sound Cities Association—Public Issues Committee(PIC) Report—Councilmember Assefa- Dawson attended the Association of Washington Cities(AWC) Conference during which she attended a workshop titled Race, Equity and Leadership. She would like to implement elements of this workshop with Council. Deputy Mayor Report — Deputy Mayor Honda reported she attended along with Councilmembers Assefa-Dawson, Koppang, and Moore attended the AWC Conference in Spokane. She encouraged applications for citizen commissions; specifically stating the Senior Commission applications are due by July 26. 4. CITIZEN COMMENT Lea Realiz_a, spoke in support of cannabis in the city; she has used traditional medications to treat her health conditions however found that cannabis works best. Nolan Cho shared his story of growing up in a conservative household and how his view has changed regarding cannabis as a use to manage panic attacks. He would the revenue generated from marijuana stores used to help educate people on its uses. Krissy Grant shared regarding her medical issues and how marijuana has helped her to cut her prescription medications in half and has decreased her number of seizers to approximately 2 per month. Bernedine Lund expressed her pleasure regarding the clean air shelters that Seattle has planned for the summer months and suggested Federal Way initiate something similar. Federal Way City Council Regular Minutes Page 3 of 9 July 5, 2019 Rodger Fowler, Belmor Park resident, shared attributes of the park that make it unique and a jewel to the senior community who reside there. He requests that the city reject the request to rezone the Belmor area to high density. Judy James shared from three different reports that address crime statistics in relation to cannabis dispensaries. Ken Blevens feels that marijuana is not the largest issue that Federal Way faces. He expressed that he would like to see more go towards law enforcement and the safety of the community. Lana Bostic urged Council to overturn the ban on marijuana retailers in Federal Way. She shared her belief that the city could benefit from the revenue generated from these businesses. Sarah Rogers shared her story of how she uses CDB to help manage her Muscular Dystrophy and Endometriosis. Ms. Rogers expressed that she would like to see the tax revenue generated from marijuana retailers to help improve funding for schools in Federal Way Brent Williams-Ruth is a State Planning and Elder Law attorney who represents seniors living in Belmor Park. Mr. Williams-Ruth urged council to reconsider rezoning Belmor. Jack Walsh spoke against allowing marijuana retailers in Federal Way. Mr.Walsh shared the results of the last vote taken and also expressed that he feels allowing marijuana stores in the city sends a negative message to youth. Chris Marr presented information to Council debunking dispensary myths and noted there is more information on the impacts of marijuana legalization and retailers in Washington State than when 1- 502 was originally passed years ago. Geoff Hastings shared information regarding the large quantity of marijuana retailers in the surrounding communities as well as findings that speak against marijuana use. Corey_Forhis urged Council to lift the ban on marijuana stores in Federal Way. He expressed that the city is losing out on valuable tax dollars. Cat Morison presented a deep history on cannabis and urged Council to allow marijuana retailers. Betty Taylor requested assistance at her apartment complex. She is having an issue with homeless people sleeping in the breezeway and littering. Ms. Taylor has brought this issue to the apartment complex management and police but there hasn't been a solution. Allison Taylor advocated for more drug and alcohol treatment centers in Federal Way.She also noted not everyone has access to a car; she feels the city should take advantage of this opportunity to create a new revenue source and allow marijuana retailers in Federal Way. Lara/_Huisinga spoke against allowing marijuana stores in Federal Way. He daughter who feels since marijuana was legalized in Washington State, marijuana use among her peers increased. He feels the cost of the vote is insignificant to the amount of money proponents are saying the city will receive in tax dollars if passed. Dianna Vaughn spoke from studies she found suggesting that an increase of accessibility to marijuana in communities leads to a rise in marijuana use among youth which can lead to other negative consequences in pediatrics and youth. Federal Way City Council Regular Minutes Page 4 of 9 July 5, 2019 Catherine North compared the accessibility of alcohol and marijuana. She feels the process and precautions marijuana retailers are required to use doesn't feel equal to that of alcohol sales. City Clerk read letters into the record from Jo Baumgartner, Mike Culleton. Melodie Hardwick.Clifford Gahrett and Lisa Miranda in favor of allowing marijuana retailers in Federal Way. City Clerk read a letter into the record from Melinda Ruiz opposing marijuana stores in Federal Way. 5. CONSENT AGENDA a. Minutes: June 18, 2019 Regular and Special Meeting Minutes b. May 2019 Monthly Financial Report c. Vouchers—05/16/2019 to 06/15/2019 d. Release Retainage- Performing Arts & Event Center Exterior Signage e. Business Licensing Services Agreement DEPUTY MAYOR HONDA MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEMS A THROUGH E ON THE CONSENT AGENDA; COUNCILMEMBER DUCLOS SECOND. The motion passed unanimously as follows: Deputy Mayor Honda yes Councilmember Koppang yes CouncilmemberAssefa-Dawson yes Councilmember Moore yes Councilmember Johnson yes Councilmember Duclos yes Councilmember Tran yes 6. COUNCIL BUSINESS a. Resolution: Authorizing the Advisory Vote Ballot Title and Explanatory Statement regarding allowing retail Marijuana stores in city limits on the November 5, 2019 General Election/APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 19-762 This item was presented with Item 6b; see below. b. Resolution: Directing the City Clerk to Advertise for Pro and Con Committee Members for the General Election Advisory Vote regarding Marijuana/APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 19-763 City Attorney Ryan Call presented both Items 6a and 6b together. He highlighted the requirements and timelines for the election cycle and also reviewed the proposed ballot title and explanatory statement. Mr. Call explained there is currently an ordinance in place banning marijuana sales which would require a new ordinance to overturn it. DEPUTY MAYOR HONDA MOVED APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ADVISORY VOTE BALLOT TITLE AND EXPLANATORY STATEMENT REGARDING ALLOWING RETAIL MARIJUANA IN CITY LIMITS ON THE NOVEMBER 5, 2019 GENERAL ELECTION; COUNCILMEMBER DUCLOS SECOND. Councilmember Johnson shared he has spoken with residents and he believes the ballot item will pass and the increased revenue will do a lot of good for programs. He is in favor of the stores and the vote. Councilmember Assefa-Dawson shared her previous fears regarding retail-marijuana stores within the city. Now that it has been years since the previous advisory vote,there is data from neighboring cities to review and feedback from citizens regarding the need for accessibility. She believes that this vote should go back to the public. Federal Way City Council Regular Minutes Page 5 of 9 July 5, 2019 Councilmember Duclos shared she owns house in Ocean Shores and there have not been issues with their stores. She supports this vote and wants people to know they have the chance to make a decision. Councilmember Tran thanked those in attendance who shared their stories and opinions. He is against retail marijuana due several studies and reports, and due to concerns with the safety of nearby homes and property. He is also concerned with the impact increased crime would have on police resources. Councilmember Koppang shared he is sympathetic to both sides and believes the dialogue has expanded to include sustainable revenue; economic development; and revenue generation. The option to return the question to the voters has developed after much discussion. Deputy Mayor Honda clarified if the advisory vote passes it does not mean stores can open; there will still be a process. City Attorney Call confirmed that Council would have to take action by ordinance in order to allow retail marijuana in Federal Way. Deputy Mayor was originally against it and spent time discussing to topic with staff and students, noting young people report they get marijuana at school and in parking lots, not at the retail stores. She is in favor of the advisory vote in order to listen to the voice of the people. Councilmember Johnson discussed potential revenue and also reported on his personal research including reports from Bellevue, Renton and Spokane of a slight decrease in crime since allowing retail marijuana stores. Councilmember Moore appreciated the civil conversation with both pros and cons being presented on the issue. He understands the concerns and was against it before; he is concerned that these stores are not congruent with the family-centered vision he has for the city. However, he believes it should be returned to the vote of the people. The motion passed 6-0 as follows: Deputy Mayor Honda yes Councilmember Koppang yes CouncilmemberAssefa-Dawson yes Councilmember Moore yes Councilmember Johnson yes Councilmember Duclos yes Councilmember Tran no DEPUTY MAYOR HONDA MOVED APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO ADVERTISE FOR PRO AND CON COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION ADVISORY VOTE REGARDING MARIJUANA; COUNCILMEMBER LYDIA SECOND. The motion passed unanimously as follows: Deputy Mayor Honda yes Councilmember Koppang yes CouncilmemberAssefa-Dawson yes Councilmember Moore yes Councilmember Johnson yes Councilmember Duclos yes Councilmember Tran yes Mayor Ferrell announced Council would take a brief recess at 9:27 p.m. At 9:33 p.m. Mayor Ferrell reconvened the meeting. c. Ethics Board Appointment (Alternate to Voting Member) Federal Way City Council Regular Minutes Page 6 of 9 Aly 5, 2019 DEPUTY MAYOR HONDA MOVED TO APPOINT KAREN KIRKPATRICK AS A VOTING MEMBER OF THE ETHICS BOARD FOR A TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 2021; COUNCILMEMBER ASSEFA-DAWSON SECOND. The motion passed 5-0 as follows: Deputy Mayor Honda yes Councilmember Koppang yes Councilmember Assefa-Dawson yes Councilmember Moore yes Councilmember Johnson not present Councilmember Duclos yes Councilmember Tran not present Councilmembers Johnson and Tran rejoin the meeting. d. Impact of Implementing HB 1406 and Qualifying Taxes for Affordable Housing Community Services Manager Sarah Bridgeford reported on House Bill 1406 which passed the Washington State Legislature focuses on affordable housing. It allows cities and counties to recapture portions of existing sales tax to be used for: • Acquiring, rehabilitating, or constructing affordable housing; • Funding operations and maintenance costs of new units; and/or • For cities with populations less than 100,000 to provide rental assistance. She noted the steps required to become a participating city and which taxes qualified. She recommended delaying action to allow time to engage with South King Housing and Homelessness Partnership (SKHHP) and King County. Additional time will results in fully developed ideas; required documentation; implementation plans; and coordination efforts with other cities. Council thanked Ms. Bridgeford for her presentation and asked for clarification regarding future steps. Ms. Bridgeford indicted this item was brought directly to Council due to the time constraints for the November Election. If Council delays action,future items will be presented at the Committee level prior to Council consideration. A general consensus was made to follow the professional recommendation of staff to study this issue further; no action was taken. DEPUTY MAYOR HONDA MOVED TO SUSPEND COUNCIL RULES AND ALLOW THE MEETING TO EXTEND PAST 10:00 PM; COUNCILMEMBER TRAN SECOND.Motion passed unanimously as follows: Deputy Mayor Honda yes Councilmember Koppang yes CouncilmemberAssefa-Dawson yes Councilmember Moore yes Councilmember Johnson yes Councilmember Duclos yes Councilmember Tran yes 7. ORDINANCES Second Reading a. Council _Bill #762 Relating to the 2019 Periodic Update of the Shoreline Master ProgramIAPPROVED ORDINANCE NO. 19-873 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL WAY REVISED CODE AND THE 2019 SHORELINE PERIODIC UPDATE; AMENDING FWRC 15.05.020, 15.05.030, 15.05,040, 15.05.050, Federal Way City Council Regular Minutes Page 7 of 9 July 5, 2019 15.05.070, 15.05.080, 15.05.090, 15.05.100, 15.05.110, 15.05.120, 15.05.140, 15.05.150. 15.05.180, 15.05.220, 15.05.240, 19.145.070, 19.145.410, 19.15.420, 19.145.460, 19.145.520; REPEALING CHAPTER 15.10; AND ADDING NEW SECTION 15.05.075. (Amending Ordinance Nos. 15-797, 11-705, 09-597, 00-375, 99-355, 98-323, 97-291, and 90-38. Planning Manager Doc Hansen presented a Powerpoint presentation outlining changes to the proposed ordinance since first reading due to feedback from the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE): • Amend language considered to improve clarification for administration. • Amend language related to proper referral to other sections of the Code. • Strike and add language which the DOE considers necessary to be consistent with State Law. City Clerk City Clerk Stephanie Courtney read the ordinance title into the record. COUNCILMEMBER KOPPANG MOVED APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AS AMENDED; COUNCILMEMBER DUCLOS SECOND. The motion passed unanimously as follows: Deputy Mayor Honda yes Councilmember Koppang yes CouncilmemberAssefa-Dawson yes Councilmember Moore yes Councilmember Johnson yes Councilmember Duclos yes Councilmember Tran yes 8. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Assefa-Dawson did not provide a report. Councilmember Johnson did not provide a report. Councilmember Tran attended the Korean Quarterly Community Meeting community meeting and thanked former Mayor Mike Park for his leadership; he is pleased to see the Korean community come together. Councilmember Koppang recently met with a young man and was was impressed with his knowledge of the city and current events. He recently attend a celebration of life for Bill Morton who recently passed away. Bill was a longtime volunteer at City Hall every Monday and a neighbor who contributed to his community in many ways. Councilmember Moore expressed his delight of Federal Way and taking advantage of the wonderful amenities and parks with his extended family. He is in the process of purchasing his first home with his wife and looks forward to raising a family here. Councilmember Duclos reminded pet owners to take care of their animals during the Fourth of July celebrations and to not let them outside. Deputy Mayor Honda wished everyone a happy and safe 4th of July providing a reminder to keep animals and children safe. She encouraged those who are interested in participating on the Pro or Con Committee to email the City Clerk directly prior to the deadline of Friday, July 12. She is excited for the 63rd Annual Salmon Bake at Steel Lake Park on July 26 and has tickets available. 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION Federal Way City Council Regular Minutes Page 8 of'9 July 5. 2019 Potential Lmtigat GR „uFs��-to--RCNV 42,30 1 10(1)�i) not needed 10. ADJOURNMENT There being nothing further on the agenda; the Regular Meeting was adjourned at 10:11 pm Attest: Stephanie Courtney City Clerk Approved by Council: Federal Way City Council Regular Minutes Page 9 of 9 July 5, 2019 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#:_6b CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT PROPOSAL FOR KING COUNTY COUNCIL ALLOCATED WATERWORKS FUNDING FOR THE STORM DRAIN ARTWALK PROJECT POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council authorize SWM Staff to submit a proposal for the King County Council allocated WaterWorks funding? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: July 1, 2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Katherine Straus, SWM Public Education and DEPT: Public Works Outreach Coordinator r' Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated July 1, 2019. Options Considered: 1. Authorize staff to submit a proposal for the King County Council allocated Waterworks funding for the Storm Drain Artwalk Project. 2. Do not authorize staff to submit a proposal for the King County Council allocated Waterworks funding for the Storm Drain Artwalk project and provide direction to staff MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1. MAYOR APPROVAL: DIRECTOR APPROVAL: ' G J zq lis ammit W ou of Initial Date Initial/Date initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: "I move to forward Option I to the July 16, 2019 Council consent agenda for approval". OV Mark Koppa Committee ChA& Je5 tilinson, Committee Member Hoang Tran,Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize staff to submit a proposal for King County Council allocated WaterWorks funding for the Storm Drain ArtWalk Project." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—12/2017 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1, 2019 TO: Land Use&Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell,Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E.,Public Works Director Katherine Straus, Surface Water Public Education and Outreach Coordinator V-S SUBJECT: Authorization to submit proposal for King County Council allocated WaterWorks Funding for the Storm Drain ArtWalk Project FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This project was not included within the approved 2019/2020 SWM operational (401) budget. As proposed, it would be funded entirely by the King County Council allocated WaterWorks Funding. Future costs would entail either providing paint to the artists for touch up work or removing the artwork once it begins to chip(est. 3-4 years) or if it is vandalized. BACKGROUND: SWM is requesting authorization to submit a proposal for King County Council allocated WaterWorks Funding to fund the Storm Drain Art Walk Project. The WaterWorks program funds projects that improve water quality within the service area of King County's regional wastewater system. The program includes both a competitive grant cycle, and Council allocated funding. In 2017-2018, 32 projects were funded through Council allocated funding, totaling over 2 million dollars. Award amounts were as small as $20,000 and as high as $195,000. Eligible activities for funding include community engagement and stewardship, education and outreach, demonstration projects, water quality monitoring, as well as a number of others. In 2015, SWM was awarded $104,500 to expand the Storming the Sound with Salmon program and include LID elements into school district curriculum. The Storm Drain ArtWalk Project falls within the categories of community engagement, education and outreach. The overall goal of the project is to improve water quality by using public art to educate the public that pollutants that go into storm drains directly impact the health of our waterways and Puget Sound. The project will communicate the values of our City and inform residents in a fun and visually appealing way that our neighborhoods are directly connected to our streams and to Puget Sound. The project will help the City meet its Education, Outreach and Public Involvement requirements under the NPDES Permit in an innovative way, while also supporting local artists, adding value to the City's public spaces, and reaching a wider audience with stormwater education messages. July 1, 2019 Land Use and Transportation Committee Authorization to submit proposal for King County Council allocated WaterWorks Funding for the Storm Drain ArtWalk Project Page 2 SWM intends to partner with the Arts Commission for a call for artists and to assist in the selection of 8 to 10 artists. SWM Staff intends to select catch basins within high pedestrian/low vehicular traffic areas to link walkability within the City. Tentative site selections include the BPA trail between SW Campus Dr. and 11th Place South, Steel Lake Park, and around the Downtown Staircase, which connects Town Square Park with the Performing Arts and Events Center. The Storm Drain ArtWalk timeline is as follows: August 2019: Apply for funding for King County Council Allocated WaterWorks Funding March 2020: Finalize mural locations, assemble review panel and create Call for Artwork April 2020: Distribute Call for Artwork May 2020: Applications and design submissions due June 2020: Review panel selects and notifies artists July 2020: Planning and prep for painting event August 2020: Storm drain painting Once the project is completed, maps of the Storm Drain ArtWalk will be available at the Community Center, City Hall, and on the SWM website, that will provide locations and artist information for interested pedestrians. COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: 6c CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:2019 STORM PIPE REPAIR PROJECT PHASE II-85%DESIGN STATUS REPORT AND AUTHORIZATION TO BID POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council authorize staff to complete design and bid the 2019 Storm Pipe Repair Project Phase II and return to the LUTC and Council for bid award, further reports, and authorization? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: July 1, 2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPT R-r BY: Fei Tan P E SWM Pro ect Fnuineer �' _ DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee Memorandum dated July 1, 2019 Options Considered: 1. Authorize staff to complete the design and bid the 2019 Storm Pipe Repair Project Phase II and return to the LUTC and Council for bid award, further reports,and authorization. 2. Do not authorize staff to bid this project and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RLCOiNINIENDA ION: Option 1. MAYOR APPROVAL: _ �: 4 DIRECTOR APPROVAL: x/ IZ 4 �(.X7111 CO elf {3111":1��)•I I'= kndill Bala Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:I move to forward Option I to the July 16, 2019 consent agenda for approval. 01 Mark Ko g,Committee Chair Jess hnson,Committee Member Hoang Tran,Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize staff to complete design and bid the 2019 Storm Pipe Repair Project Phase II and return to the LUTC and Council for bid award,further reports, and authorization." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—12/2017 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1,2019 TO: Land Use&Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell,Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E.,Public Works Director Fei Tang,P.E., SWM Project Engineer 2019 Storm Pipe Repair Project Phase Il 85%Design Status Report and Authorization to SUBJECT: Bid FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This project was authorized under the 2017 Surface Water Management(SWM) CIP budget update (304, Project 288) with an estimated budget of$100,000. SWM staff has requested additional funding for this project as the cost of pipe rehabilitation is higher than originally estimated. Under the 2019 budget adjustment, SWM has requested a transfer of$79,000 from the remaining balance of the completed Lakota Wetland Berm Repair project(304, Project 283) to this project. In accordance with the approved budget this project is funded by SWM Utility Tax. Upon completion of this project, ongoing costs associated with operations and maintenance will be performed and funded through surface water management maintenance. Funding requirements for operations and maintenance of infrastructure is reviewed and adjusted as required during the budget process. BACKGROUND: This project will repair deteriorated storm water pipes. These pipes were identified by the 2018 Storm Drain CCTV Inspection and Assessment project. The 2018 Storm Drain CCTV Inspection and Assessment project started in 2018. The goal of the project is to proactively inspect storm drain assets and identify maintenance and repair needs before they cause flooding and/or other damage. The project has identified numerous deteriorated pipes that are in need of repair. The project for repairing these deteriorated pipes has been divided into two phases. Phase I includes the pipes that must be repaired with the open cut method. Phase II will repair the pipes with a more cost effective trenchless method. Phase I contract has been awarded and is scheduled to be constructed in this summer. The following provides a brief synopsis of the progress on this project to date. The project design is approximately 85% complete, which includes the following completed tasks: • Identify pipe defects and repair method • Identify existing utilities in the vicinity of the repair sites • Request SEPA and Critical Area Code exemptions • Project design plan, specifications and cost estimate(PS&E)—85% July 1,2019 Land Use and Transportation Committee 2019 Storm Pipe Repair Project 85%Design Status Report and Authorization to Bid Page 2 Ongoing tasks include: • City right of way permit • Contract PS&E to 100% Project estimated expenditures: 2019 Storm Pipe Repair Project Phase I Construction $80,200 Phase 110% Construction Contingency $8,020 2019 Storm Pipe Repair Project Phase II Construction $82,000 Phase 11 10% Construction Contingency $8,200 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $178,420 Available Funding: Budgeted by 2017 SWM CIP Update $100,000 Transfer from Project 283 $79,000 Total Project Funding $179,000 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: 6d ............ CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: SOUTH 348TH STREET ENTRANCE SIGN 30%DESIGN REPORT POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council authorize staff to proceed with the design of the South 348th Street Entrance Sign and return to the LUTC and Council at the 85%design completion for further reports and authorization? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: July 1,2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: John Mulkey,P.E. Street Systems Project Engineer DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated July 1,2019 Staff report to LUTC Options Considered: 1. Authorize staff to proceed with design of South 348th Street Entrance Sign and return to the LUTC and Council at the 85% design completion stage for further reports and authorization. 2 Do not authorize staff to proceed with this project and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the July 16,2019 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. MAYOR APPROVAL: (p 7 �j' DIRECTOR APPROVAL: Ca mute L' ur: i; Initial/Date Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option I to the July 16, 2019 City Council consent agenda for approval. , 14 i Coin] ee Chair 'Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize staff to proceed with design of South 34e Street Entrance Sign and return to the LUTC and Council at the 85%design completion stage for further reports and authorization." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED-4/2019 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1, 2019 TO: Land Use &Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell, Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh, P.E., Public Works Director John Mulkey, P.E., Street System Project Engineer SUBJECT: South 348th Street Entrance Sign—30%Design Status Report Financial Impacts: The cost to the City for the South 348th Street Entrance Sign was included within the approved budget under the Fund 109 Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax for 2017/2018, 2018/2019 and 2019/2020. In accordance with the approved budget,this item is funded by Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax of$32,200 for each budget period. Upon completion of the S 348th Street Entrance Sign future costs will be approximately$1,030.00 per year for electricity. There have been no other costs associated with the current sign to date as the only issue was covered under warrantee. PROJECT ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES: Design $5,000 Construction $70,000 10%Construction Contingency $7,000 Construction Management $3,000 Total Project Costs $85,000 AVAILABLE FUNDING: LTAC Funds($32,200 for 3 years) $96,600 Total Project Funding $96,600 Background Information: This project would construct a new LED Entrance Sign in the Median of S 348"' Street between Enchanted Parkway/16th Avenue S and Pacific Highway South. The sign will be visible to eastbound and westbound traffic and will be able to provide information on upcoming events within the City similar to the current sign on South 3201' Street. The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee at their June 12, 2019 meeting approved$32,200 of the available funding be used for the advancement of electrical work via the Limited Public Works Process. Staff will return to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee and the Land Use&Transportation Committee at a later date in 2020 for 85% Design Status and Authorization to Bid. Rev 7/18 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: 6e-- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:2019 ASPHALT OVERLAY PROJECT CHANGE ORDER AND CONTINGENCY RESET POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council approve transferring$110,000 from Traffic Impact Fee Account to the 2019 Asphalt Overlay Project for additional pavement repair and reset construction contingency to 4%of $58,295? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: July 1,2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Jeff Huynh, Street Systems Engineer_ DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated July 1,2019. Options Considered: 1. Authorize the Mayor to transfer$110,000 from Traffic Impact Fee Account to the 2019 Asphalt Overlay Project for additional pavement repair and reset the construction contingency to 4%of$58,295. 2. Do not authorize the Mayor to transfer $110,000 from Traffic Impact Fee Account to the 2019 Asphalt Overlaq Project for additional pavement repair.and reset the construction contingency to 4%of$58,295. 111- 111, 11- 1MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the July 16,2019 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. MAYOR APPROVAL: CQ DIRECTOR APPROVAL:� �2��11 C"o nce 'C@ll il I GlnitiaMate ei initial.I]atc COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I7 move to forward Option I to the July 16, 2019 Council consent agenda for approval: " Mark Koppa g,Comrni,tt& Chair WseJohnson, Committee Hoang Tran,Committee Member member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to approve of transferring$110,000 from Traffic Impact Fee Account to the 2019 Asphalt Overlay Project for additional pavement repair and reset the construction contingency to 4%of$58,295." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED 1ST reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED-12/2017 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1,2019 TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell,Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E.,Public Works Director Jeff Huynh, Street Systems Engineer SUBJECT: 2019Asphalt Overlay Project Change Order and Contingency Reset BACKGROUND: In March 2019,Council authorized the award of the 2019 Asphalt Overlay Project to Miles Resources,LLC in the amount of $1,428,229 and approved a 2% construction contingency of $28,038. The construction contingency is utilized for unanticipated construction cost overruns (e.g. pavement repair being more than anticipated). The S 336'h St pavement had substandard thickness (3") and will not be able to service 70 King County Metro and _`0 Fedenil W,,iv Sdiool. District bus trips per week. Staff proposes adding 4 feet wide,6 inches thick and 1.700 feet loll tri,I INIA Ctllss PG 58H-77 pavement repair to Westbound S 336`i' St between Pacific Hwy S and 1011i PI S to bring the pavement to standard. Based on current project progress, it is anticipated that the project will be completed in September 2019. Therefore, staff recommends moving the $110,000 from Traffic Impact Fee Account to the 2019 Asphalt Overlay Project where there is immediate need and reset the construction contingency to 4%which is$58,295. REVENUE 2019 Overlay Budget $ 1,514,000 2019 Structure Budget $ 166,267 Traffic Impact Fee(TIF) $ 110,000 Total= $ 1,790,267 EXPENDITURES Original Contract $ 1,428,229 Original Contingency(2%) $ 28,038 S 336`x'St pa,.'einent Repair $ 51,705 Contingency Reset(4%) $ 58,295 Pavement Management System $ 70,000 In-house Design and Construction Administration $ 150,000 Printing and Advertising S 4,000 Total= $ 1,790,267 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: _6f CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: 2020 ASPHALT OVERLAY PROGRAM PRELIMINARY PROJECT LIST AND AUTHORIZATION TO BID POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council approve the 2020 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Project List, and authorize staff to proceed with the design and bid of the proposed 2020 Asphalt Overlay Program? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: July 1,2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Jeff Huynh, Street Systems Engineer -- DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated July 1, 2019. Options Considered: 1. Approve the list of streets for the 2020 Asphalt Overlay Project as presented. Furthermore, authorize staff to bid all or part of the 2020 Asphalt Overlay Project, returning with a request for permission to award the project within the available 2020 Asphalt Overlay Budget to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder. 2. Direct staff to modify the preliminary list and return to Committee for further action. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the July 16,2019 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. MAYOR APPROVAL: _ �/ /I .2y�s DIRECTOR APPROVAL: 2/ 071q k C'omluil[cee Council Initisl Date Initial/Date Initia UDate COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:1 move to forivard Option I to Me July 16, 2019 Council consent agenda for approval It Mark Koppan , 'oininittee C air J se Johnson, Committee Hoang Tran,Committee Member member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to approve the list of streets for the 2020 Asphalt Overlay Project as presented. Furthermore, authorize staff to bid all or part of the 2020 Asphalt Overlay Project, returning with a request for permission to award the project within the available 2020 Asphalt Overlay Budget to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED IST reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—12/2017 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1,2019 TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell,Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E.,Public Works Director Jeff Huynh, Street Systems Engineer -1* SUBJECT: 2020 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Project List and Authorization to Bid FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This Project is fully funded in the Capital Improvement Budget(Project 102).Total available budget for 2020 is$2,457,454. See available budget break down below. BACKGROUND: Public Works staff has developed a list of recommended streets for the 2020 Asphalt Overlay Program. The total estimated budget for the program is $2,457,454 and is comprised of the following: • 2020 Proposed Overlay Budget Fuel Tax $530,000 Real Estate Excise Tax $1,013,000 • 2020 Structures Budget-Street Fund $166,267 • 2019 Carry Forward(estimate) $0 • The Ridge(contingency upon funding) $748,187 TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE $2,457,454 The transfer of the $166,267 from the structures budget is for the City's annual Sidewalk Maintenance Program, and will cover the costs associated with the replacement of substandard wheelchair ramps, and repairing existing curb, gutter,and sidewalks within the overlay project area. The following is a preliminary list of streets to be included in the 2020 Asphalt Overlay Program. The streets were selected using the City's Pavement Management System and were verified by field reconnaissance. The costs shown are estimated and will be refined as the design of each schedule is completed. A project vicinity map and more detailed area maps are attached for your information. SCHEDULE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT A S 312th St(Pacific Hwy S to 8th Ave S) $599,654 B Hoyt Rd SW (SW 326th St to SW 320th St) $285,794 C 1st Ave S (SW 301st St to City Limit) $273,062 D PVR/20th Ave S (S 320th St to S 316th St) $200,501 E PVR/20th Ave S (S 316th St to S 312th St) $225,748 F The Ridge(Division 1,2,3,and 5) $748,187 ESTIMATED SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COSTS: $2,332,946 10%Construction Contingency $233,295 In-house Design $60,000 Construction Administration $100,000 Printing and Advertising $4,000 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROGRAM COST: $2,730,241 July 1,2019 Land Use and Transportation Committee 2020 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Project List and Authorization to Bid Page 2 of 2 The estimated cost of $2,730,241 is a preliminary figure used for estimating purposes only and includes construction administration, in-house design and construction management, printing and advertising. The 2020 Asphalt Overlay Project will be awarded within the available overlay program budget. Once Council approves the list of streets for the Overlay Program, staff will begin the final design. The anticipated date for advertising is January 2020,with construction beginning in April 2020. 2020 ASPHALT OVERLAY City of Federal Way PRELIMINARY PROJECT LIST L--.J a .r •l i \• A a ' e" ti r- rt • �� _ ;may • 7 L/ Legend i.—..—.! City Limits .� Schedule A =� i B !.f C j i.. - D E - s Federal Way 0 1 2 Miles LAY City of Federal Way 2020 ASPHALT OVERSCHEDULE ANARY PROJECT LIST WY�w.N Nv raYi%+1-f909 306 —' o� ST 0 3p6 A . S Q Q Q �[ 00 m S 308 ST S cn S 309 ST C/) Q Q oo S 309 PL �* S 310 PL C/) Q ST 313 S 313 ST ST v) Q ci2 S314ST m QvCo Q� C/),! Legend S 315 ST Schedule > S 31 - A 316 ST S316ST 1 U) 0 500 1,000 ,—A Federal Way N 71 Feet 2020 ASPHALT OVERLAY PRELIMINARY PROJECT LISTo;.F; City of Federal Way SCHEDULE B �;w�,�, �v»eas�oao SW 317 PL -� � S J SW 319 PL Y J < 319 LN Co N < �t ST 320 PL � 32 3: 3�: Co C/) J J Q 321ST 0- Cl- CY) 04 322 ST S .Q O �- --4 Cy) to Q A SW 323 � I' SW 324 PL v cn Q tih Q�- S W b cb Lo s`1A -o SW 325 PL � 326 ~ ~ 7ro o SW 327 a -J � a, � � ST �. En 327 PL Legend 27 PL � Schedule F- > 328 PL � B VV U < SW 32� Y Co 0 500 1,000 AFederal Way N i Feet 2020 ASPHALT OVERLAY PRELIMINARY PROJECT LIST ,w�,9 City of Federal Way SCHEDULE C SW 292 ST L. .._.._....._ .._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._...r.._... � C/) S 293 WS T Q Q S 293 PL M N r S 494 Pt C496 ,off S295 � S PL J , S296PL Q Q n co N � ND.. M0- 297 ST CO S 297 PL SW 298 PL Q J N N �� S 299 PL 299 299 ST PL a- > 300 U) C/) N ST Q Q �- > 309 PL M 'ITN � U 301 301 Legend �'1 ST N ST ST r..�..� i r i City Limits 00 Schedule T DASH -- �__ NT FAD 1 J C N 0- C/) 0 500 1,000 ��Federal way N i Feet LAY City of Federal Way 2020 ASPHALT OVERSCHEDULE DNARY PROJECT LIST M N 314 ST S3151 S316ST S316ST S316 S316PLG- S3 � s LL > --S-.318 PL U) S N S3 W Cn S 322 S Legend S 34 ST Schedule S 324 PL WINGED FOOT 0 500 1,000 Federal way N i Feet 2020 ASPHALT OVERLAY PRELIMINARY PROJECT LIST City of Federal Ways' , SCHEDULE E N N U) Q S310ST W NU S 312 ST ! s 7 > Co N . ......... 314.. ST S315L S316ST S316ST S316L � � w S 316 PL S3 S318PL U) S -------------------- Q - - ---. Q 31 CL N Legend Schedule __ S 2 E 0 500 1,000 Federal way N Feet �� 2020 ASPHALT OVERLAY PRELIMINARY PROJECT LISTw�M City of Federal Way SCHEDULE F =,:!:,S CO W 329 ST co > > ��O r LOQ .I- Q Sk 33 0 sowl SW 331 SW 331 U) ST ST QQ > SW 332 + "' Q : _-_ C.0 U) CT .1 S w `� - �33 STS, SW 333 J CT SW 334 cn s 2 PLco r5 `s' J CT Q s SW 335 ST` tK T 335, 7 CT ST) ccjt)l)- CO C �`� S 337 s 3 LN L � J 33 �Y S Legend S 338 PL Schedule G R S F J 0 500 1,000 Federal Wa��y y N i Feet �� COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: 61� ............ I........... CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL SYSTEM PHASES I&II PROCUREMENT POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council authorize the Mayor to execute the Professional Services Agreement to procure and implement an Adaptive Traffic Signal Control System? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: July 1,2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance [I" Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Rick Perez,P.E.,City Traffic Engineer DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use Auld Tr p rtation C mmittee.memorandum dated July 1,2019. DtAp fVt e'60 -0 tc�-,1 S,C"lCt" , � 16 t j\Aoh Options Considered: J 1. Authorize the Mayor to execute the Professional Services Agreement. 2. Do not authorize the Mayor to execute the Professional Services Agreement and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1. MAYOR APPROVAL: /�DIRECTOR APPROVAL: Z1 `� un ittec Cbuici j InitiaUDate Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: "I move to forward Option 1 to the July 16, 2019 Council consent agenda for approval." Mark Kop an Committee Chair Jesse,J son,Committee Member Hoang Tr ,Committee member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize the Mayor to execute the Professional Services Agreement." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED 1sT reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—12/2017 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1, 2019 TO: Land Use&Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell,Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E.,Director of Public Work ,_Rick Perez, P.E., City Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: Adaptive Traffic Signal Control System Phases I&II Procurement FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This project was included and is projected to be completed within the approved budget under capital project 202. In accordance with the approved budget this project is funded by a grant from Puget Sound Regional Council in the amount of $860,000, a grant from Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) in the amount of$900,000, and $240,000 of remaining capital project funds from the unbuilt intersection improvements at 10t"Avenue SW and SW Campus Drive. Upon completion of this project, ongoing costs associated with operations and maintenance will be performed and funded through traffic maintenance. Funding requirements for operations and maintenance of infrastructure is reviewed and adjusted as required during the budget process. BACKGROUND: In 2016, Council authorized the submittal of a grant application to fund the Adaptive Traffic Control System Phase 1, which includes 25 intersections in the City Center area, and on S 320th Street, including two intersections controlled by WSDOT and two intersections controlled by King County. PSRC awarded the City a federal Congestion Management and Air Quality program grant of $860,000. The Council also authorized the submittal of a grant application to fund Phase II, which includes 19 intersections south of City Center and east of I" Way S, including four intersections controlled by WSDOT. WSDOT awarded the City a federal Highway Safety Improvement Program grant of$900,000. Staff used a RFP process to select a consultant to develop the federally-required Systems Engineering documentation, which is used to develop system requirements to achieve the City's goals of optimizing traffic signal timing on a real-time basis. A separate RFP was then issued to select the system. Staff received four proposals. A selection committee was established that included engineering and maintenance staff from WSDOT and King County. After a detailed review of the proposals evaluating the ability to meet system requirements, procurement costs, operation and maintenance costs including software licensing and the cost of future expansion per intersection, reference checks, and selected site visits, the selection committee selected the proposal submitted by Western Systems for the SCOOT system developed by Siemens. The attached Professional Services Agreement has been negotiated by staff to maximize value to the City and provide 5 years of software licensing and maintenance for 44 intersections for $990,186.48. The inclusion of six WSDOT signals will require the City to assume the operation and maintenance of those traffic signals, at an estimated cost of$21,000 per year. Following the initial 5 years, software licensing July 1,2019 Land Use and Transportation Committee Adaptive Traffic Signal Control System Phases I&11 Procurement Page 2 and support is estimated at $700 per intersection per year. Future expansion is estimated to cost $7500 per intersection. Remaining project costs include the construction of the Traffic Management Center in City Hall at an estimated cost of$100,000 and installation of improved traffic detection to support the signal system is estimated at $400,000. The consultant agreement is for $450,000. Thus, the total estimated cost of the project is $1,940,186.48, below the $2,000,000 project budget. The project is estimated to be completed in Spring 2020. Normally, professional service agreements are not required to be brought to City Council for approval. However, the implementation of this project falls under capital funding, and staff committed to return to LUTC and city council with project award and progress update. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), the grant administrator, required the use of a professional services agreement for this project given it is primarily software purchase and deployment services. Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Agreement Number: Does this Require DES filing? ❑ Yes ❑Q No Firm/Organization Legal Name (do not use dba's): Western Systems, Inc. Address Federal Aid Number 1122 Industry St. Bldg. B., Everett, WA 98203 HSIP-0005(464) UBI Number Federal TIN or SSN Number 602 090 725 91-2099547 Execution Date Completion Date July 30, 2019 December 31, 2020 1099 Form Required Federal Participation ❑� Yes ❑ No Yes ❑ No Project Title Citywide Adaptive Traffic Control System- System Procurement Description of Work This project would provide for the implementation of an adaptive traffic control system. This project includes the Federal Way Urban Center,particularly on S 320th Street and SR 99, and extends southward on SR 99 to include SR 18 and SR 161 for a total of forty-four (44) intersections. ❑ Yes % Q No DBE Participation Maximum Amount Payable: $990,186.48 ❑ Yes % No MBE Participation ❑ Yes % 0 No WBE Participation ❑ Yes % No SBE Participation Index of Exhibits Exhibit A Scope of Work L-� �D-3.LP LLlL lc llp t0.-Ll 1iS B Ep l nYY not used Exhibit C Preparation and Delivery of Electronic Engineering and Other Data Exhibit D Prime Consultant Cost Computations Exhibit E Sub-consultant Cost Computations Exhibit F Title VI Assurances Exhibit G Certification Documents Ehik 'it H lneiv- is not used Exhibit I Alleged Consultant Design Error Procedures Exhibit J Consultant Claim Procedures Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 1 of 13 RovicPH 111MIM17 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as shown in the "Execution Date"box on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT, between the City of Federal Way, a municipal corporation , hereinafter called the "AGENCY," and the "Firm/Organization Name" referenced on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT, hereinafter called the "CONSULTANT." WHEREAS, the AGENCY desires to accomplish the work referenced in "Description of Work" on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT and hereafter called the "SERVICES;" and does not have sufficient staff to meet the required commitment and therefore deems it advisable and desirable to engage the assistance of a CONSULTANT to provide the necessary SERVICES; and WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT represents that they comply with the Washington State Statutes relating to professional registration, if applicable, and has signified a willingness to furnish consulting services to the AGENCY. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants, and performance contained herein, or attached and incorporated and made a part hereof,the parties hereto agree as follows: I. General Description of Work The work under this AGREEMENT shall consist of the above-described SERVICES as herein defined, and necessary to accomplish the completed work for this project. The CONSULTANT shall furnish all services, labor, and related equipment and, if applicable, sub-consultants and subcontractors necessary to conduct and complete the SERVICES as designated elsewhere in this AGREEMENT. II. Scope of Work The Scope of Work and projected level of effort required for these SERVICES is described in Exhibit"A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. The Scope of Work was developed utilizing performance based contracting methodologies. III. General Requirements All aspects of coordination of the work of this AGREEMENT with outside agencies, groups, or individuals shall receive advance approval by the AGENCY. Necessary contacts and meetings with agencies, groups, and/or individuals shall be coordinated through the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT shall attend coordination,progress, and presentation meetings with the AGENCY and/or such State, Federal, Community, City, or County officials, groups or individuals as may be requested by the AGENCY. The AGENCY will provide the CONSULTANT sufficient notice prior to meetings requiring CONSULTANT participation. The minimum required hours or days' notice shall be agreed to between the AGENCY and the CONSULTANT and shown in Exhibit"A." The CONSULTANT shall prepare a monthly progress report, in a form approved by the AGENCY, which will outline in written and graphical form the various phases and the order of performance of the SERVICES in sufficient detail so that the progress of the SERVICES can easily be evaluated. The CONSULTANT, any sub-consultants, and the AGENCY shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws, rules, codes, regulations, and all AGENCY policies and directives, applicable to the work to be performed under this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 2 of 13 Ravhzi-d 111n119n17 Participation for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) or Small Business Enterprises (SBE), if required, per 49 CFR Part 26 shall be shown on the heading of this AGREEMENT. If DBE firms are utilized at the commencement of this AGREEMENT, the amounts authorized to each firm and their certification number will be shown on Exhibit`B" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. If the Prime CONSULTANT is a DBE certified firm they must comply with the Commercial Useful Function (CUF) regulation outlined in the AGENCY's "DBE Program Participation Plan" and perform a minimum of 30% of the total amount of this AGREEMENT. It is recommended, but not required, that non-DBE Prime CONSULTANTS perform a minimum of 30% of the total amount of this AGREEMENT. In the absents of a mandatory UDBE, a voluntary SBE goal amount of ten percent of the Consultant Agreement is established. The Consultant shall submit a SBE Participation Plan prior to commencing work. Although the goal is voluntary, the outreach efforts to provide SBE maximum practicable opportunities are not. The CONSULTANT, on a monthly basis, shall enter the amounts paid to all firms involved with this AGREEMENT into the wsdot.diversitycompliance.com program. Payment information shall identify any DBE Participation. Non-minority, woman owned DBEs does not count towards UDBE goal attainment. All Reports, PS&E materials, and other data furnished to the CONSULTANT by the AGENCY shall be returned. All electronic files, prepared by the CONSULTANT, must meet the requirements as outlined in Exhibit "C — Preparation and Delivery of Electronic Engineering and other Data." All designs, drawings, specifications, documents, and other work products, including all electronic files, prepared by the CONSULTANT prior to completion or termination of this AGREEMENT are instruments of service for these SERVICES, and are the property of the AGENCY. Reuse by the AGENCY or by others, acting through or on behalf of the AGENCY of any such instruments of service, not occurring as a part of this SERVICE, shall be without liability or legal exposure to the CONSULTANT. Any and all notices or requests required under this AGREEMENT shall be made in writing and sent to the other party by (i) certified mail, return receipt requested, or(ii)by email or facsimile, to the address set forth below: If to AGENCY: If to CONSULTANT: Name: Rick Perez Name: Zach Hoiting Agency: City of Federal Way Agency: Western Systems, Inc. Address: 33325 8th Ave South Address: 1122 Industry St. Bldg. B City: Federal Way State: WA Zip: 98003 City: Everett State: WA Zip: 98203 Email: rick.perez@cityoffederalway.com Email: zhoiting@WestemSytems-Inc.com Phone: 253.835.2740 Phone: 253.438.1133 Facsimile: 253.835.2709 Facsimile: 425.438.1585 IV. Time for Beginning and Completion The CONSULTANT shall not begin any work under the terms of this AGREEMENT until authorized in writing by the AGENCY. This AGREEMENT may require filing with the Department of Enterprise Services (DES) pursuant to RCW 39.26.140. If such approval is required by DES, this AGREEMENT shall not bind the AGENCY until approved by DES. If the AGREEMENT must be approved by DES,work cannot begin, nor payment made until ten (10) or more working days following the date of filing, and until approved by DES. Any subsequent SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT may also be subject to filing and/or approval from DES. All work under this AGREEMENT shall be completed by the date shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT titled "Completion Date." The established completion time shall not be extended because of any delays attributable to the CONSULTANT, but may be extended by the AGENCY in the event of a delay attributable to the AGENCY, or because of unavoidable delays caused by an act of GOD, or governmental actions, or other conditions beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. A prior supplemental AGREEMENT issued by the AGENCY is required to extend the established completion time. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 3 of 13 Rpwi-cad 11inv7n1z V. Payment Provisions The CONSULTANT shall be paid by the AGENCY for completed SERVICES rendered under this AGREEMENT as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full compensation for SERVICES performed or SERVICES rendered and for all labor,materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete SERVICES. The CONSULTANT shall conform to all applicable portions of 48 CFR Part 31 (www.ecfr.gov). The estimate in support of the lump sum amount is attached hereto as Exhibits "D"and "E" and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. A. Lump Sum Agreement: Payment for all consulting SERVICES shall be on the basis of a lump sum amount as shown on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT. B. Maximum Amount Payable: The Maximum Total Amount Payable by the AGENCY to the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT shall not exceed the amount shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT on page one (1.) The Maximum Amount Payable does not include payment for extra work as stipulated in section XIII, "Extra Work."No minimum amount payable is guaranteed under this AGREEMENT. C. Monthly Progress Payments: The CONSULTANT may submit billings to the AGENCY for reimbursement of costs on a monthly basis. To provide a means of verifying the billed salary costs for the CONSULTANT's employees, the AGENCY may conduct employee interviews. These interviews may consist of recording the names, titles, salary rates, and present duties of those employees performing work on the SERVICES at the time of the interview. D. Final Payment: Final Payment of any balance due the CONSULTANT of the gross amount earned will be made promptly upon its verification by the AGENCY after the completion of the SERVICES under this AGREEMENT, contingent, if applicable,upon receipt of all PS&E,plans, maps, notes, reports, electronic data, and other related documents which are required to be fumished under this AGREEMENT. Acceptance of such Final Payment by the CONSULTANT shall constitute a release of all claims for payment,which the CONSULTANT may have against the AGENCY unless such claims are specifically reserved in writing and transmitted to the AGENCY by the CONSULTANT prior to its acceptance. Said Final Payment shall not, however, be a bar to any claims that the AGENCY may have against the CONSULTANT or to any remedies the AGENCY may pursue with respect to such claims. The payment of any billing will not constitute agreement as to the appropriateness of any item and at the time of final audit all required adjustments will be made and reflected in a final payment. In the event that such final audit reveals an overpayment to the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT will refund such overpayment to the AGENCY within thirty (30) calendar days of notice of the overpayment. Such refund shall not constitute a waiver by the CONSULTANT for any claims relating to the validity of a finding by the AGENCY of overpayment. Per the WSDOT's "Audit Guide for Consultants," Chapter 23 "Resolution Procedures," the CONSULTANT has twenty(20) working days after receipt of the final Post Audit to begin the appeal process to the AGENCY for audit findings. E. Inspection of Cost Records: The CONSULTANT and their sub-consultants shall keep available for inspection by representatives of the AGENCY and the United States, for a period of six (6)years after receipt of final payment, the cost records and accounts pertaining to this AGREEMENT and all items related to or bearing upon these records with the following exception: if any litigation, claim or audit arising out of, in connection with, or related to this AGREEMENT is initiated before the expiration of the six (6)year period, the cost records and accounts shall be retained until such litigation, claim, or audit involving the records is completed. A post audit may be performed on this AGREEMENT. The audit, if any, will be performed by the State Auditor, WSDOT's Internal Audit Office and/or at the request of the AGENCY's Project Manager . Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 4 of 13 RPvi,ar►11in1i2n17 VI. Sub-Contracting The AGENCY permits subcontracts for those items of SERVICES as shown in Exhibit"A" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall not subcontract for the performance of any SERVICE under this AGREEMENT without prior written permission of the AGENCY. No permission for subcontracting shall create, between the AGENCY and sub-consultant, any contract or any other relationship. Compensation for this sub-consultant SERVICES shall be based on the cost factors shown on Exhibit"E" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. All reimbursable direct labor, indirect cost rate, direct non-salary costs and fixed fee costs for the sub-consultant shall be negotiated and substantiated in accordance with section V"Payment Provisions"herein and shall be memorialized in a final written acknowledgement between the parties. All subcontracts shall contain all applicable provisions of this AGREEMENT, and the CONSULTANT shall require each sub-consultant or subcontractor, of any tier, to abide by the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT. With respect to sub-consultant payment, the CONSULTANT shall comply with all applicable sections of the STATE'S Prompt Payment laws as set forth in RCW 39.04.250 and RCW 39.76.011. The CONSULTANT, sub-recipient, or sub-consultant shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the CONSULTANT to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this AGREEMENT, which may result in the termination of this AGREEMENT or such other remedy as the recipient deems appropriate. VII. Employment and Organizational Conflict of Interest The CONSULTANT warrants that they have not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure this contract, and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warrant, the AGENCY shall have the right to annul this AGREEMENT without liability or, in its discretion, to deduct from the AGREEMENT price or consideration or otherwise recover the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. Any and all employees of the CONSULTANT or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required of the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT, shall be considered employees of the CONSULTANT only and not of the AGENCY, and any and all claims that may arise under any Workmen's Compensation Act on behalf of said employees or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims made by a third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the CONSULTANT's employees or other persons while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein, shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall not engage, on a full- or part-time basis, or other basis, during the period of this AGREEMENT, any professional or technical personnel who are, or have been, at any time during the period of this AGREEMENT, in the employ of the United States Department of Transportation or the AGENCY, except regularly retired employees, without written consent of the public employer of such person if he/she will be working on this AGREEMENT for the CONSULTANT. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 5 of 13 Ravi,zAri 1vn119n17 VIII. Nondiscrimination During the performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT, for itself, its assignees, sub-consultants, subcontractors and successors in interest, agrees to comply with the following laws and regulations: • Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 • Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. Chapter 21 Subchapter V § 2000d (Public Law 100-259) through 2000d-4a) • American with Disabilities Act of 1990 • Federal-aid Highway Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. Chapter 126 § 12101 et. seq.) (23 U.S.C. Chapter 3 § 324) • 23 CFR Part 200 • Rehabilitation Act of 1973 • 49 CFR Part 21 (29 U.S.C. Chapter 16 Subchapter V § 794) • 49 CFR Part 26 • Age Discrimination Act of 1975 • RCW 49.60.180 (42 U.S.C. Chapter 76 § 6101 et. seq.) In relation to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the CONSULTANT is bound by the provisions of Exhibit"F" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT, and shall include the attached Exhibit "F"in every sub-contract, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. IX. Termination of Agreement The right is reserved by the AGENCY to terminate this AGREEMENT at any time with or without cause upon ten (10) days written notice to the CONSULTANT. In the event this AGREEMENT is terminated by the AGENCY, other than for default on the part of the CONSULTANT, a final payment shall be made to the CONSULTANT which, when added to any payments previously made, shall total the same percentage of the Lump Sum Amount as the work completed at the time of termination is to the total work required for the SERVICES. In addition,the CONSULTANT shall be paid for any authorized extra work completed. No payment shall be made for any SERVICES completed after ten (10) days following receipt by the CONSULTANT of the notice to terminate. If the accumulated payment made to the CONSULTANT prior to Notice of Termination exceeds the total amount that would be due when computed as set forth in paragraph two (2) of this section, then no final payment shall be due and the CONSULTANT shall immediately reimburse the AGENCY for any excess paid. If the services of the CONSULTANT are terminated by the AGENCY for default on the part of the CONSULTANT, the above formula for payment shall not apply. In the event of a termination for default, the amount to be paid to the CONSULTANT shall be determined by the AGENCY with consideration given to the actual costs incurred by the CONSULTANT in performing SERVICES to the date of termination, the amount of SERVICES originally required which was satisfactorily completed to date of termination, whether that SERVICE is in a form or a type which is usable to the AGENCY at the time of termination, the cost to the AGENCY of employing another firm to complete the SERVICES required and the time which may be required to do so, and other factors which affect the value to the AGENCY of the SERVICES performed at the time of termination. Under no circumstances shall payment made under this subsection exceed the amount, which would have been made using the formula set forth in paragraph two (2) of this section. If it is determined for any reason that the CONSULTANT was not in default or that the CONSULTANT's failure to perform is without the CONSULTANT's or its employee's fault or negligence, the termination shall be deemed to be a termination for the convenience of the AGENCY. In such an event, the CONSULTANT would be reimbursed for actual costs in accordance with the termination for other than default clauses listed previously. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 6 of 13 RavicPrl 11/n119n17 The CONSULTANT shall, within 15 days, notify the AGENCY in writing, in the event of the death of any member, partner, or officer of the CONSULTANT or the death or change of any of the CONSULTANT's supervisory and/or other key personnel assigned to the project or disaffiliation of any principally involved CONSULTANT employee. The CONSULTANT shall also notify the AGENCY, in writing, in the event of the sale or transfer of 50% or more of the beneficial ownership of the CONSULTANT within 15 days of such sale or transfer occurring. The CONSULTANT shall continue to be obligated to complete the SERVICES under the terms of this AGREEMENT unless the AGENCY chooses to terminate this AGREEMENT for convenience or chooses to renegotiate any term(s) of this AGREEMENT. If termination for convenience occurs; final payment will be made to the CONSULTANT as set forth in the second and third paragraphs of this section. Payment for any part of the SERVICES by the AGENCY shall not constitute a waiver by the AGENCY of any remedies of any type it may have against the CONSULTANT for any breach of this AGREEMENT by the CONSULTANT, or for failure of the CONSULTANT to perform SERVICES required of it by the AGENCY. Forbearance of any rights under the AGREEMENT will not constitute waiver of entitlement to exercise those rights with respect to any future act or omission by the CONSULTANT. X. Changes of Work The CONSULTANT shall make such changes and revisions in the completed work of this AGREEMENT as necessary to correct errors appearing therein, without additional compensation thereof. Should the AGENCY find it desirable for its own purposes to have previously satisfactorily completed SERVICES or parts thereof changed or revised, the CONSULTANT shall make such revisions as directed by the AGENCY. This work shall be considered as Extra Work and will be paid for as herein provided under section XIII "Extra Work." XI. Disputes Any disputed issue not resolved pursuant to the terms of this AGREEMENT shall be submitted in writing within 10 days to the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer, whose decision in the matter shall be final and binding on the parties of this AGREEMENT; provided however, that if an action is brought challenging the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer's decision, that decision shall be subject to judicial review. If the parties to this AGREEMENT mutually agree, disputes concerning alleged design errors will be conducted under the procedures found in Exhibit"J". In the event that either party deem it necessary to institute legal action or proceeding to enforce any right or obligation under this AGREEMENT, this action shall be initiated in the Superior Court of the State of Washington, situated in the county in which the AGENCY is located. The parties hereto agree that all questions shall be resolved by application of Washington law and that the parties have the right of appeal from such decisions of the Superior Court in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT hereby consents to the personal jurisdiction of the Superior Court of the State of Washington, situated in the county in which the AGENCY is located. Xll. Legal Relations The CONSULTANT, any sub-consultants, and the AGENCY shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws, rules, codes, regulations and all AGENCY policies and directives, applicable to the work to be performed under this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify, and hold the State of Washington (STATE) and the AGENCY and their officers and employees harmless from all claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the negligence of, or the breach of any obligation under this AGREEMENT by, the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable; provided that nothing herein shall require a CONSULTANT Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 7 of 13 Rnvhzad 1i1n112n17 to defend or indemnify the STATE and the AGENCY and their officers and employees against and hold harmless the STATE and the AGENCY and their officers and employees from claims, demands or suits based solely upon the negligence of, or breach of any obligation under this AGREEMENT by the STATE and the AGENCY, their agents, officers, employees, sub-consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the STATE and/or the AGENCY may be legally liable; and provided further that if the claims or suits are caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of(a) the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub-consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT is legally liable, and (b) the STATE and or the AGENCY, their agents, officers, employees, sub-consultants, subcontractors and or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the STATE and or the AGENCY may be legally liable, the defense and indemnity obligation shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the CONSULTANT's negligence or the negligence of the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub-consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable. This provision shall be included in any AGREEMENT between CONSULTANT and any sub-consultant, subcontractor and vendor, of any tier. The CONSULTANT shall also defend, indemnify, and hold the STATE and the AGENCY and their officers and employees harmless from all claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the alleged patent or copyright infringement or other allegedly improper appropriation or use of trade secrets, patents, proprietary information, know-how, copyright rights or inventions by the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub-consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable, in performance of the Work under this AGREEMENT or arising out of any use in connection with the AGREEMENT of methods, processes, designs, information or other items furnished or communicated to STATE and/or the AGENCY, their agents, officers and employees pursuant to the AGREEMENT; provided that this indemnity shall not apply to any alleged patent or copyright infringement or other allegedly improper appropriation or use of trade secrets, patents, proprietary information, know-how, copyright rights or inventions resulting from STATE's and/or the AGENCY'S, their agents', officers' and employees'failure to comply with specific written instructions regarding use provided to STATE and/or the AGENCY, their agents, officers and employees by the CONSULTANT, its agents, employees, sub-consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable. The CONSULTANT's relation to the AGENCY shall be at all times as an independent contractor. Notwithstanding any determination by the Executive Ethics Board or other tribunal, the AGENCY may, in its sole discretion, by written notice to the CONSULTANT terminate this AGREEMENT if it is found after due notice and examination by the AGENCY that there is a violation of the Ethics in Public Service Act, Chapter 42.52 RCW; or any similar statute involving the CONSULTANT in the procurement of, or performance under, this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT specifically assumes potential liability for actions brought by the CONSULTANT's own employees or its agents against the STATE and/or the AGENCY and, solely for the purpose of this indemnification and defense, the CONSULTANT specifically waives any immunity under the state industrial insurance law, Title 51 RCW. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the Parties. Unless otherwise specified in this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall be responsible for administration of construction contracts, if any, on the project. Subject to the processing of a new sole source, or an acceptable supplemental AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT shall provide On-Call assistance to the AGENCY during contract administration. By providing such assistance, the CONSULTANT shall assume no responsibility for: proper construction techniques,job site safety, or any construction contractor's failure to perform its work in accordance with the contract documents. The CONSULTANT shall obtain and keep in force during the terms of this AGREEMENT, or as otherwise required, the following insurance with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to Title 48 RCW. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 8 of 13 RPvhzind 11in112n17 Insurance Coverage A. Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the STATE. B. Commercial general liability insurance written under ISO Form CG 00 01 12 04 or its equivalent with minimum limits of one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence and two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) in the aggregate for each policy period. C. Business auto liability insurance written under ISO Form CG 00 01 10 01 or equivalent providing coverage for any "Auto" (Symbol 1)used in an amount not less than a one million dollar($1,000,000.00) combined single limit for each occurrence. Excepting the Worker's Compensation Insurance and any Professional Liability Insurance, the STATE and AGENCY, their officers, employees, and agents will be named on all policies of CONSULTANT and any sub- consultant and/or subcontractor as an additional insured (the "AIs"), with no restrictions or limitations concerning products and completed operations coverage. This coverage shall be primary coverage and non-contributory and any coverage maintained by the AIs shall be excess over, and shall not contribute with, the additional insured coverage required hereunder. The CONSULTANT's and the sub-consultant's and/or subcontractor's insurer shall waive any and all rights of subrogation against the AIs. The CONSULTANT shall furnish the AGENCY with verification of insurance and endorsements required by this AGREEMENT. The AGENCY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time. All insurance shall be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT shall submit a verification of insurance as outlined above within fourteen (14) days of the execution of this AGREEMENT to: Name: Tonia Proctor Agency: City of Federal Way Address: 33325 8th Ave South City: Federal Way State: WA Zip: 98003 Email: tonia.proctor@cityoffederalway.com Phone: 253.835.2561 Facsimile: No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty (30) days prior notice to the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT's professional liability to the AGENCY, including that which may arise in reference to section IX "Termination of Agreement" of this AGREEMENT, shall be limited to the accumulative amount of the authorized AGREEMENT or one million dollars ($1,000,000.00), whichever is greater, unless the limit of liability is increased by the AGENCY pursuant to Exhibit H. In no case shall the CONSULTANT's professional liability to third parties be limited in any way. The parties enter into this AGREEMENT for the sole benefit of the parties, and to the exclusion of any third party, and no third party beneficiary is intended or created by the execution of this AGREEMENT. The AGENCY will pay no progress payments under section V"Payment Provisions" until the CONSULTANT has fully complied with this section. This remedy is not exclusive; and the AGENCY may take such other action as is available to it under other provisions of this AGREEMENT, or otherwise in law. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 9 of 13 Rpwi,zPci ii1n119n17 XIII. Extra Work A. The AGENCY may at any time,by written order, make changes within the general scope of this AGREEMENT in the SERVICES to be performed. B. If any such change causes an increase or decrease in the estimated cost of, or the time required for,performance of any part of the SERVICES under this AGREEMENT, whether or not changed by the order, or otherwise affects any other terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall make an equitable adjustment in the: (1) maximum amount payable; (2) delivery or completion schedule, or both; and (3) other affected terms and shall modify this AGREEMENT accordingly. C. The CONSULTANT must submit any "request for equitable adjustment,"hereafter referred to as "CLAIM," under this clause within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the written order. However, if the AGENCY decides that the facts justify it, the AGENCY may receive and act upon a CLAIM submitted before final payment of this AGREEMENT. D. Failure to agree to any adjustment shall be a dispute under the section XI "Disputes" clause. However, nothing in this clause shall excuse the CONSULTANT from proceeding with the AGREEMENT as changed. E. Notwithstanding the terms and conditions of paragraphs (A.) and (B.) above, the maximum amount payable for this AGREEMENT, shall not be increased or considered to be increased except by specific written supplement to this AGREEMENT. XIV. Endorsement of Plans If applicable, the CONSULTANT shall place their endorsement on all plans, estimates, or any other engineering data furnished by them. XV. Federal Review The Federal Highway Administration shall have the right to participate in the review or examination of the SERVICES in progress. XVI. Certification of the Consultant and the AGENCY Attached hereto as Exhibit"G-1(a and b)" are the Certifications of the CONSULTANT and the AGENCY, Exhibit "G-2".Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters - Primary Covered Transactions, Exhibit"G-3" Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying and Exhibit "G-4" Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data. Exhibit "G-3" is required only in AGREEMENT's over one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) and Exhibit"G-4" is required only in AGREEMENT's over five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00.) These Exhibits must be executed by the CONSULTANT, and submitted with the master AGREEMENT, and returned to the AGENCY at the address listed in section III "General Requirements"prior to its performance of any SERVICES under this AGREEMENT. XVII. Complete Agreement This document and referenced attachments contain all covenants, stipulations, and provisions agreed upon by the parties. No agent, or representative of either party has authority to make, and the parties shall not be bound by or be liable for, any statement, representation, promise or agreement not set forth herein. No changes, amendments, or modifications of the terms hereof shall be valid unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties as a supplement to this AGREEMENT. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 10 of 13 Rav►cad 1110112n17 XVlll. Execution and Acceptance This AGREEMENT may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original having identical legal effect. The CONSULTANT does hereby ratify and adopt all statements, representations, warranties, covenants, and AGREEMENT's contained in the proposal, and the supporting material submitted by the CONSULTANT, and does hereby accept this AGREEMENT and agrees to all of the terms and conditions thereof. XIX. Protection of Confidential Information The CONSULTANT acknowledges that some of the material and information that may come into its possession or knowledge in connection with this AGREEMENT or its performance may consist of information that is exempt from disclosure to the public or other unauthorized persons under either chapter 42.56 RCW or other local, state or federal statutes ("State's Confidential Information"). The "State's Confidential Information" includes, but is not limited to, names, addresses, Social Security numbers, e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, financial profiles, credit card information, driver's license numbers, medical data, law enforcement records (or any other information identifiable to an individual), STATE and AGENCY source code or object code, STATE and AGENCY security data, non-public Specifications, STATE and AGENCY non-publicly available data,proprietary software, STATE and AGENCY security data, or information which may jeopardize any part of the project that relates to any of these types of information. The CONSULTANT agrees to hold the State's Confidential Information in strictest confidence and not to make use of the State's Confidential Information for any purpose other than the performance of this AGREEMENT, to release it only to authorized employees, sub-consultants or subcontractors requiring such information for the purposes of carrying out this AGREEMENT, and not to release, divulge,publish, transfer, sell, disclose, or otherwise make it known to any other party without the AGENCY's express written consent or as provided by law. The CONSULTANT agrees to release such information or material only to employees, sub-consultants or subcontractors who have signed a nondisclosure AGREEMENT, the terms of which have been previously approved by the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT agrees to implement physical, electronic, and managerial safeguards to prevent unauthorized access to the State's Confidential Information. Immediately upon expiration or termination of this AGREEMENT,the CONSULTANT shall, at the AGENCY's option: (i) certify to the AGENCY that the CONSULTANT has destroyed all of the State's Confidential Information; or(ii) returned all of the State's Confidential Information to the AGENCY; or(iii) take whatever other steps the AGENCY requires of the CONSULTANT to protect the State's Confidential Information. As required under Executive Order 00-03, the CONSULTANT shall maintain a log documenting the following: the State's Confidential Information received in the performance of this AGREEMENT; the purpose(s) for which the State's Confidential Information was received; who received, maintained and used the State's Confidential Information; and the final disposition of the State's Confidential Information. The CONSULTANT's records shall be subject to inspection, review, or audit upon reasonable notice from the AGENCY. The AGENCY reserves the right to monitor, audit, or investigate the use of the State's Confidential Information collected, used, or acquired by the CONSULTANT through this AGREEMENT. The monitoring, auditing, or investigating may include, but is not limited to, salting databases. Violation of this section by the CONSULTANT or its sub-consultants or subcontractors may result in termination of this AGREEMENT and demand for return of all State's Confidential Information, monetary damages, or penalties. It is understood and acknowledged that the CONSULTANT may provide the AGENCY with information which is proprietary and/or confidential during the term of this AGREEMENT. The parties agree to maintain the confidentiality of such information during the term of this AGREEMENT and afterwards. All materials containing such proprietary and/or confidential information shall be clearly identified and marked as "Confidential" and shall be returned to the disclosing party at the conclusion of the SERVICES under this AGREEMENT. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 11 of 13 RPvicPH 11/n1/9n17 The CONSULTANT shall provide the AGENCY with a list of all information and materials it considers confidential and/or proprietary in nature: (a) at the commencement of the term of this AGREEMENT; or(b) as soon as such confidential or proprietary material is developed. "Proprietary and/or confidential information" is not meant to include any information which, at the time of its disclosure: (i) is already known to the other party; (ii) is rightfully disclosed to one of the parties by a third party that is not acting as an agent or representative for the other party; (iii) is independently developed by or for the other party; (iv) is publicly known; or (v) is generally utilized by unaffiliated third parties engaged in the same business or businesses as the CONSULTANT. The parties also acknowledge that the AGENCY is subject to Washington State and federal public disclosure laws. As such, the AGENCY shall maintain the confidentiality of all such information marked proprietary and/ or confidential or otherwise exempt,unless such disclosure is required under applicable state or federal law. If a public disclosure request is made to view materials identified as "Proprietary and/or confidential information" or otherwise exempt information, the AGENCY will notify the CONSULTANT of the request and of the date that such records will be released to the requester unless the CONSULTANT obtains a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction enjoining that disclosure. If the CONSULTANT fails to obtain the court order enjoining disclosure, the AGENCY will release the requested information on the date specified. The CONSULTANT agrees to notify the sub-consultant of any AGENCY communication regarding disclosure that may include a sub-consultant's proprietary and/or confidential information. The CONSULTANT notification to the sub-consultant will include the date that such records will be released by the AGENCY to the requester and state that unless the sub-consultant obtains a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction enjoining that disclosure the AGENCY will release the requested information. If the CONSULTANT and/or sub-consultant fail to obtain a court order or other judicial relief enjoining the AGENCY by the release date, the CONSULTANT shall waive and release and shall hold harmless and indemnify the AGENCY from all claims of actual or alleged damages, liabilities, or costs associated with the AGENCY's said disclosure of sub-consultants' information. XX. Records Maintenance During the progress of the Work and SERVICES provided hereunder and for a period of not less than six (6) years from the date of final payment to the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT shall keep, retain and maintain all "documents"pertaining to the SERVICES provided pursuant to this AGREEMENT. Copies of all "documents" pertaining to the SERVICES provided hereunder shall be made available for review at the CONSULTANT's place of business during normal working hours. If any litigation, claim or audit is commenced, the CONSULTANT shall cooperate with AGENCY and assist in the production of all such documents. "Documents" shall be retained until all litigation, claims or audit findings have been resolved even though such litigation, claim or audit continues past the six (6) year retention period. For purposes of this AGREEMENT, "documents" means every writing or record of every type and description, including electronically stored information ("ESI"), that is in the possession, control, or custody of the CONSULTANT, including, without limitation, any and all correspondences, contracts,AGREEMENT `s, appraisals, plans, designs, data, surveys, maps, spreadsheets, memoranda, stenographic or handwritten notes, reports, records, telegrams, schedules, diaries, notebooks, logbooks, invoices, accounting records, work sheets, charts, notes, drafts, scribblings, recordings, visual displays,photographs, minutes of meetings, tabulations, computations, summaries, inventories, and writings regarding conferences, conversations or telephone conversations, and any and all other taped, recorded, written, printed or typed matters of any kind or description; every copy of the foregoing whether or not the original is in the possession, custody, or control of the CONSULTANT, and every copy of any of the foregoing, whether or not such copy is a copy identical to an original, or whether or not such copy contains any commentary or notation whatsoever that does not appear on the original. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 12 of 13 RPvicPa 11inv2n17 For purposes of this AGREEMENT, "ESI" means any and all computer data or electronic recorded media of any kind, including "Native Files", that are stored in any medium from which it can be retrieved and examined, either directly or after translation into a reasonably useable form. ESI may include information and/or documentation stored in various software programs such as: Email, Outlook, Word, Excel,Access, Publisher, PowerPoint,Adobe Acrobat, SQL databases, or any other software or electronic communication programs or databases that the CONSULTANT may use in the performance of its operations. ESI may be located on network servers, backup tapes, smart phones, thumb drives, CDs, DVDs, floppy disks, work computers, cell phones, laptops or any other electronic device that CONSULTANT uses in the performance of its Work or SERVICES hereunder, including any personal devices used by the CONSULTANT or any sub-consultant at home. "Native files" are a subset of ESI and refer to the electronic format of the application in which such ESI is normally created, viewed, and/or modified. The CONSULTANT shall include this section XX"Records Maintenance" in every subcontract it enters into in relation to this AGREEMENT and bind the sub-consultant to its terms, unless expressly agreed to otherwise in writing by the AGENCY prior to the execution of such subcontract. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the day and year shown in the "Execution Date"box on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT. Signature Date Signature Date Any modification, change, or reformation of this AGREEMENT shall require approval as to,form by the Office of the Attorney General. Agreement Number: Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Page 13 of 13 Ravi-QPrl 11/n1/9n17 4Ve s terii Systems Exhibit A 1 Scope of Work www,westernsystems-inc.com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, WA 98203 P:425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry Systems 2 Scope of Services This project will allow the City of Federal Way to take a major proactive step in mitigating traffic congestion on S 320th Street,S 336th Street,S 348th St/SR 18,Pacific Hwy S/SR 99,Enchanted Parkway S/SR 161/16 1h Ave S,and eventually the rest of the city.The primary goals of an Adaptive Control System (ACS) are to reduce delay,manage queue lengths, reduce stops, decrease travel time, increase traveler safety and reduce side street delays at signalized intersections along heavily traveled corridors.The ACS will effectively accomplish this by adjusting signal timing in real time to accommodate the continuous and sometimes unpredictable fluctuation in traffic and pedestrian demand on these corridors. Western Systems will furnish, install new traffic signal ATC controllers, a TACTICS Central system software,SCOOT®adaptive system software,and central system hardware for the City of Federal Way. In addition, we will fine tune the systems, review the existing detection, provide training and 5 years of ongoing support. For City of Federal Way intersections Western Systems will provide SIEMENS M62ATC Controllers with SEPAC5 software. Imbedded in the SEPAC is the SCOOT operation protocol for the Adaptive system. For the WSDOT type 332L/332DL cabinets using 2070E/ATC controllers, we will require WSDOT to update to the latest Siemens SEPAC5 local controller software. Western Systems has assembled a strong team to meet the technical and administrative requirements of the City of Federal Way project. Resumes for all project team members can be found in Appendix A —Project Team Resumes of the project proposal. Western Systems will lead and manage the team as well as provide the adaptive control software, server and computer hardware,Siemens M62ATC and TACTICS Central System,project management, integration, training, and support. John Brannan will lead efforts as Project Manager and will be responsible for successful project delivery. John Brannan, Ryan McKibben and Ken Buchanan will be the technical points of contact with Federal Way staff and will manage the installation. Siemens will provide software operational support, technical deployment expertise, field installation assistance,operational scope deliverables and 360'support services.James Chavis and Peter Marshall will lead Siemens efforts and assist Western Systems in project delivery. Western Systems will employ a collaborative and open approach when implementing the adaptive control system in Federal Way. Our goal will be to have city staff as well as any associated consultants and stakeholder staff involved in every step of the project and will in effect use the project implementation period as an extended training period.The formal training near the actual go-live date then serves as a capstone session and ensures that responsible staff has the knowledge and ability to effectively operate the system from Day 1. Our approach will include the following tasks, outlined below and described in more detail in the scope of work. The Western Systems team will kick off the project by meeting with the City of Federal Way's key staff and stakeholders. Objective is to draft and adopt a scope of services plan detailing; project deliverables and schedule,discussing custom software elements of the SCOOT and TACTICS systems, Graphic User Interface (GUI) Design development, detector surveys and field deployment phases, any traffic engineering improvements that could improve operations,schedule fortraining for key staff members,ongoing support and access, payment milestones and acceptance criteria and any perceived project risk factors. www.westernsystems-inc.com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett,WA 98203 1 P;425,438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry We propose the following work plan task structure: 3 Task 1—Project Management Task 2—Data Aggregation Task 3—Detailed Assessment of Conditions and Detector Survey Task 4—Siemens M62ATC Installation and Database Conversion Task 5—SCOOT®Software and TACTICS Central system installation Task 6—Database Design Task 7—QA/QC Task 8—Graphical User Interface(GUI) Development Task 9—Download to Signals and Field Calibration Task 10—System Fine Tuning Task 11—Systems and Local Map Development Task 12—Training Task 13—Verification Task 14—Acceptance and Support Task 1—Project Management The Western System team will proactively manage and update the City of Federal Way via reporting and communications structures as agreed upon in the kick-off meeting. By using the processes, practices and templates of best practice as identified in the Project Management Institute(PMI) Book of Knowledge,we seek to keep the city in the know, and proactively bring to your attention issue items rather than react to them after they have happened.By actively monitoring progress and technical details,we can work together to anticipate issue matters so these can be addressed before becoming problematic. The standards of the PMI are important to achieving a high-quality deployment. However, to deliver a challenging project like this one, being able to identify&respond to matters and elevate those that might become issues requires diligence and open communications. At project commencement, the Western Systems' team will meet with the City of Federal Way Project Management team, King County traffic operations,the consultant team and any others identified by the city to be present. Our team will meet with City staff to present the stages of deployment, and then obtain existing documentation for all relevant intersections and field equipment(e.g.,as-built schematic diagrams, control databases). The purpose of this kickoff meeting is to fine tune the project deliverables (i.e. understanding the detection layout at each intersection, determine schedule for field modifications, identify and graphics required, and to determine training schedules), stages of deployment, schedule, project objectives, critical path items, areas of responsibility for Western Systems,the City of Federal Way and other stakeholders, project reporting, and communication plans. In addition, this meeting will clarify project issues, sequence of events, events requiring long lead times, project milestones, identification and discussion of project risks and an introduction of our team and their roles in the project. Western Systems and Siemens have experience managing multi-agency projects. To ensure the communication needs of all agency stakeholders are met, the Kickoff Meeting will identify in the project management plan the stakeholders,the kinds of information,frequency and format that should be used to communicate project reports. In addition, the project management plan will identify the roles and responsibilities of all the project team. For this project, we envision holding regular meetings once per month with the City's project manager and other stakeholders throughout the duration of the project.Bi-monthly meetings may be required duringthe first few months of the project. Western Systems will provide schedule updates in MS Project monthly throughout the project,from the kickoff until the final acceptance of the SCOOT®system. www,westernsystems-inc.com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, WA 98203 1 P;425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry S t ti,(o Systems Task 2—Data Aggregation 4 As detailed in Validation Plan; Federal Way desires "Smooth Flow", "Maximized Person Throughput" and "Minimized Transit Delay", "Access Equity", "Management of Queues" and "Improved Safety". Western Systems will assist the city stakeholders as needed in accumulating the data required on the adaptive corridors to get an assessment of current conditions and give the City of Federal Way a true analysis of the state of travel before implementing the adaptive system. Task 3—Detailed Assessment of Conditions and Detector Survey The Western Systems team will perform a detailed survey in the field to determine the suitability of existing detectors and determine where detectors should be added for optimal performance.As part of this survey Western Systems will make recommendations for future enhancements to increase operational efficiency of quality of service. Also, existing communication cabling and signal cabinet equipment will be evaluated. After the survey has been compiled,the Western Systems team will meet with City personnel to provide a recommendation on the most cost-effective solutions for deployment to meet the project goals, and longevity of system operation. Western Systems will also investigate the location for the control room equipment and identify any issues in getting communications back from the field, and how best to lay out the servers and workstations in the control room. During this task, Federal Way staff should attend the one-day training session that will occur prior to SCOOT®operation.Understanding of SCOOT®detection strategies,and direct involvement of City personnel are important for the deployment success. Task 4—Siemens M62ATC Installation and Database Conversion The Western Systems team members will perform a detailed database conversion from the Econolite controllers currently in the field to match current operations.As part of this conversion,Western Systems can make recommendations for future enhancements to increase operational efficiency of quality of service. Following, Western Systems will work in conjunction with the City and King County to install the Siemens M62 controllers at each location. During installation, Western Systems will visually monitor the operation of the signal and get acceptance from the City and/or King County of operations. Also, existing communication cabling and signal cabinet equipment will be evaluated. Task 5—SCOOT'Software and TACTICS Central System Installation This is a basic task of a deployment, and one that to a degree was initiated in Task 4 where our team will have surveyed the communications and central office facilities.Our team will install new servers(or virtual servers) with the capability to handle a city-wide deployment. The servers will have robust reliability, performance,and expandability to handle all practical aspects of the systems deployment.The servers will be tested for the necessary SCOOT® and TACTICS software and communications needs of the project prior to deployment by Western Systems team.Western Systems will work closely with the City of Federal Way engineering and IT staff to deploy the servers within the network parameters requested. The same methodology will be used for any workstations, laptops or redundant servers located with other municipalities. SCOOT®Hardware The SCOOT®servers will meet the following minimum specifications: • Intel Xeon Dual Core 2.8GHz with RAID capable motherboard • 4Gb RAM • 2 X 160Gb hard disk with SATA II NCQ interface(in Raid 1 configuration—mirrored pair) • Graphics card capable of 1280x1024 in 32-bit color @ 72Hz www•westernsystems-inc.com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, WA 98203 1 P;425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry ,-.,.'Systems • 2 x 10/100Mb Ethernet Network Interface Ports 5 • DVD-ROM reader/writer • Monitor(can be shared monitor with KVM switch) • Keyboard&mouse • 20Gb External Hard Disk USB2/Firewire for system backups ■ OS-Windows Server 2008 Standard • X Client-OpenText Exceed v14 • Backup software-Acronis Backup and Recovery v11.5 Server Edition The SCOOT°communications server will meet the following minimum specifications: • Intel Xeon Dual Core 2.8GHz with RAID capable motherboard • 4Gb RAM • 2 X 160Gb hard disk with SATA II NCQ interface(in Raid 1 configuration—mirrored pair) • Graphics card capable of 1280x1024 in 32-bit color @ 72Hz • 2 x 10/100Mb Ethernet Network Interface Ports ■ DVD-ROM reader/writer 0 Monitor(can be shared monitor with KVM switch) • Keyboard&mouse • 20Gb External Hard Disk USB2/Firewire for system backups • OS-Windows Server 2008 Standard The TACTICS servers if used will meet the minimum requirements as specified in-Ex-Nib": Task 6—Database Design Western Systems will take information gathered from the detector and equipment surveys, and the database migration to develop translation plans(these are the equivalent of timing plans)that identify the phases that will be permitted in SCOOT® "Stages" or phasing groups. Evaluation of the minimum timings needed for phasing will be made and engineering judgement is used to achieve optimal timing performance. While this stage involves database design,and data entry,it should be emphasized that this stage in is where the SCOOT®translation plans and other key parameters are developed, and timings are loaded and tested by our engineers. For SCOOT® to work optimally, traffic engineering judgment must be exercised for the development of the translation plans and other SCOOT®parameters.As this task involves considerably more traffic engineering than the task name might imply and because we feel this is one of the key tasks of deploying a SCOOT®system successfully,we will invite key city operations staff to join us in this activity as informal training. Task 7—QA/QC Western Systems is committed to producing a high-quality product and thereafter providing outstanding support.Our quality control plan is developed with this goal and we apply process-oriented reviews at key points in the project to make sure the deployment is consistent with the agencies vision.Western Systems internal quality and cost control practices are firmly rooted in the systems engineering process. For each project(depending on size and scope),we employ a formal or informal Quality and Cost Control Plan(ACCP) procedure.The ACCP procedure places a specific emphasis on the quality of the products to be provided to the client.The quality portion of the plan consists of two parts:quality assurance and quality control. The Quality Assurance element ensuresthatthe day-to-day accomplishments of the project are completed in an efficient,professional manner;the most appropriate staff members are assigned to each individual work item and are working within their skill levels; and a peer review process is in place to ensure that the best approach to specific problems is being undertaken. Formal QA on this project will involve periodic and www,westernsystems-inc,com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, WA 98203 1 P:425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions,support and manufacturing for the transportation industry ;>. "�,,r-lSystems regular review of project deliverables.That is especially relevant in this project with two parallel tracks to 6 install the system and the field devices.This is a good place to gauge what has been done and what needs to be done for project completion. The Quality Control element formalizes and specifies in detail the checking and review process for each deliverable prior to its final production. At each project milestone or for each deliverable, the Western Systems team conducts a technical audit and review. Typically included in this process are records management, documentation control, and corrective action procedures (if required). Formal QC on the project applies primarily to written deliverables. The key benefit to our customers is the knowledge that you are getting deliverables that have been reviewed by experienced experts in the field. Task 8—Graphical User Interface (GUI) Development Western Systems will work collaboratively with the City of Federal Way to provide a custom interface.There are a couple of options that we can offer for the background that include either a satellite image or schematic, background. Along with these there is a palate of options that will enhance the information available to the operator as well as actions that can be performed. All costs for licensing satellite imagery (if needed)will be paid for by the City of Federal Way. Task 9—Download to Signals and Field Calibration The Western Systems team will provide qualified representatives to be on-site for the deployment of the complete ACS system in accordance with the implementation plan and completion of all field work if required, by the City. Deployment will proceed methodically,and it is our intent to utilize one team of our staff in the field to minimize work zone impacts during the deployment. Western Systems will work collaboratively with Federal Way and King County personnel to coordinate the necessary access to office, back office, and field equipment. Once the central system and street equipment installation is complete,validation can start.At this point it is not necessary for all the street equipment to have been installed. Time can often be saved by a rolling program of street installation and validation. Any rolling program must be strictly controlled to ensure validated parts of the system are not disturbed.Detectors will be checked for operation and that valid data are received at the correct locations in the SCOOT°database. Basic SCOOT®street data will then start to be collected and entered into the database. It is not possible to collect this data until the SCOOT® detectors have been checked. Only when all the equipment has been checked and all the SCOOT® data entered will any attempt be made to run intersections under SCOOT® control. Each intersection will be validated in turn by first observing its operation in SCOOT® monitor mode, and then briefly in SCOOT°command mode. Once all signals in the group are successfully communicating, operating the translated existing timings, reporting valid data for all detectors,and confirmed to operate correctly with SCOOT®,adaptive control will be turned on and monitored for correct operation for the entire group. Western Systems team members will review the operation and fine tune SCOOT®configuration parameters as needed. Task 10—System Fine Tuning Western Systems will review the operation and fine tune SCOOT® configuration parameters where warranted.In most deployments, it is prudent to retain the initial and default settings. Intersections will be closely observed by a traffic engineer. If performance improvements can be made by altering the initial and default settings,these changes are made, and operations observed to confirm operations have improved within the field conditions. www.westernsystems-inc.com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, WA 98203 1 P;425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry x-,r r,Systems Task 11—System and Local Map Development 7 Western Systems will provide a system map and local intersection maps as part of the project scope. Map development may begin with the database migration process and will be completed during the training component. Some maps will be designed by Federal Way representatives during the training process. Details of the map layouts, design standards and informational displays can be addressed in the project management scope or regular meetings with key personnel.Western Systems will work collaboratively with Federal Way to create map displays that deliver all key elements yet remain aesthetically pleasing. Task 12—Training The Western Systems team will provide training for SCOOT® adaptive control system and TACTICS Central System software that covers the operation, system configuration, calibration, and maintenance. Each training shall provide an overview of the entire system including the central system, field hardware, software,communications,functionality, operation,and how to maintain the system.To enable maximum learning and benefit from this course, there will be both classroom sessions and exercises.These will be interactive training opportunities, seeking to attain input and comments from the audience to maximize interest and exchange of information. Training Western Systems will provide comprehensive training to suitably qualified Engineers and Technicians with the knowledge and practical skill sets to troubleshoot, configure, administer, calibrate, and maintain the SCOOT® and TACTICS system in terms of database modification, operation and, where applicable, system calibration and maintenance skills. Several practical sessions and exercises, both interactive and demonstrative, will be incorporated to maximize learning. We will provide necessary training materials, including:Draft Training Plan, Final Training Plan,Training Phase I—During Deployment&Testing,Training Phase II — After Acceptance, System Configuration Documents, Operation/Maintenance Manuals, Troubleshooting Guide, Recommended Operating/Maintenance Policy. Course Overview There will be a one-day course prior to system deployment,an another one-day course six months after the deployment of the SCOOT®and TACTICS systems.The principal learning opportunity will come from a three- day course that will provide professionals the knowledge and practical skills required to support and administer SCOOT° on a day to day basis. Training shall be done at a cty facilities, and shall include the following system operation topics: • ASC Operations • Troubleshooting • Preventive Maintenance • Equipment Repair • System Configuration System Calibration • System Administration Example Course Content: • An overview of the design of a SCOOT®system and hardware used from servers to the field • A detailed description of all the hardware used and its operational features. • Principals of SCOOT®will be explained • System Administration,security levels and multi-jurisdictional applications • A detailed description of the GUI display and how it can be used www.westernsystems-inc,com J 1122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, WA 98203 1 P:425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry We sternSyrtr, ,'�7 • Operational commands will be explained in detail defining both the format and the function of g thecommands • System database amendment will be discussed and will include picture generation • System maintenance philosophy will be explained in detail to cover items such as:fault logs and their interpretation, hardware fault displays and their analysis and use of test equipment • Siemens support and ongoing Western Systems interaction Course Objectives: • Provide Federal Way and King County with a general working knowledge of SCOOT'and the system structure • Familiarize staff with the layout of the hardware and its operational features • Provide knowledge of the operational commands required to support the system Ample interactive opportunity for agency staff to develop a working knowledge of database editing procedures • Federal Way will be provided opportunities to demonstrate a working knowledge of the maintenance philosophy for the system which includes fault information and how to collect and analyze the data • Western Systems will make sure City of Federal Way understands the systems,what Western Systems and Siemens has available as support services, and how we can assist the city moving forward so all stakeholders are comfortable before project closing Task 13—Verification Western Systems will provide a detailed verification plan for SCOOT® to meet the System Requirements and our own standards. Our goal is to work collaboratively with Federal Way to complete the testing in an efficient manner. Task 14—Acceptance and Support Overthe course of the project,Western Systems team will work collaboratively with the Federal Way staff to determine benchmarks for final acceptance testing and confirmation. Examples of test criteria can be provided or discussed at length during the interview process of kick-off meeting. Once the project has been accepted Western Systems will start the one-year warranty period and the beginning of the SCOOT® Support package as detailed in the cost proposal. System Maintenance, Warranty, and Support Western Systems will provide support 7:00am —5:00pm PST and all phone or email requests will be responded to within 24 hours of receipt.On site health checks will be made on an annual basis provided a Siemens SCOOT® maintenance agreement is in place as well as access to our SCOOT® user group and list of peer users. www.westernsystems-inc.com 1122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, WA 98203 1 P:425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry 9 Project Schedule Western Systems proposes the following tentative schedule for the ACS deployment.We can be flexible with these dates and we want this schedule to work for the City of Federal Way personnel. This is especially important when installing the servers with the IT staff,or during the training sessions. Schedule is subject to change. ID Task Name Start Finish 1 Project Management 9/4/2019 5/1/2020 1a Scope of Work 9/4/2019 9/9/2019 1b Kick-Off Meeting 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 2 Data Aggregation 9/11/2019 9/30/2019 3 Detailed Assessment of Conditions 9/18/2019 9/28/2019 3a Field Assessment of Cabinets 9/18/2019 9/23/2019 3b Detector Survey 6/24/2019 7/19/2019 3c Analysis 10/1/2019 10/3/2019 4 M62ATC Controller Installation 10/10/2019 11/10/2019 5 _ SCOOT Software-Server Installations 10/19/2019 10/31/2019 6 Database Design 10/14/2019 11/12/2019 7 QA/QC 11/13/2019 3/25/2020 8 GUI Development 10/29/2019 12/28/2019 9 Download to Signals and Field Calibration 11/12/2019 3/25/2020 10 System Fine Tuning 3/25/2020 5/1/2020 11 Systems and Local Map Development 1/1/2020 1/19/2020 12 Training 1/4/2020 5/8/2020 13 Verification 5/1/2020 6/1/2020 13 Project Acceptance/Support Begins 5/1/2020 4/30/2025 www,westernsystems-inc.com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, WA 98203 P;425A38.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry rNeste.rnSystems Exhibit-13— -A lI ��C 1'1 6�. �� 10 TACTICS System Requirements www.westernsystems-inc,com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett,WA 98203 P;425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry SIEMENS �k�.ei•.0 if�-For G fe. l '.n The TACTICST" Central Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) is part of the Siemens intelligent traffic portfolio, working with Siemens Advanced Traffic Controllers (including the latest M60, 2070LX and ATC options) together with the Siemens SEPAC controller software to provide advanced technologies and functionality that creates a robust and efficient traffic management environment. This document presents the recommended and minimum hardware and software requirements for a TACTICSTm 5 installation. TACI-ICSTM -System Requirements ©2018,Siemens Mobility,Inc. TACTICSTm-System Requirements I 1 _. This section outlines the recommended requirements for any TACTICS'T'system in terms of hardware and software to allow users to get the most advanced features out of the system in an optimal way. TACTICS installation types Database Laptop Operating Windows Server 2016 64- Windows Server 2016 Windows 10 64-bit Windows 10 64-bit System bit 64-bit SQL Server MS SQL Server 2016 MS SQL Server 2016 N/A NIA Processor Intel Xeon E7 Intel Xeon E7 Intel 6 Intel i5 Memory 16GB RAM 16GB RAM 4GB RAM 8GB RAM Hard Disk 80G9 160GB 40GB 40GB Space Screen 1366x768 or higher 1366x768 or higher 1366x768 or higher 1366x768 or higher XGA and SXGA+active matrix display Peripherals Keyboard, mouse or Keyboard, mouse or Keyboard, mouse or Keyboard, mouse or compatible pointing device compatible pointing compatible pointing compatible pointing device device device Network Network adapter(2Gbps) Network adapter Network adapter Network adapter (2Gbps) (wireless) or 56k modem (optional) CD/DVD drive I Required Required Optional Optional Web browser Internet Explorer 11 Internet Explorer 11 Internet Explorer 11 Internet Explorer 11 Tab/e 1:Recommended system requirements TACTICSTm-System Requirements ©2018,Siemens Mobility,Inc. usa.siemens.com/intelligenttraffic TACTICSTM-System Requirements __. This section contains the minimum requirements for a TACTICS' system in terms of hardware and software, split into two categories:one for Tier 1 systems(small to medium-sized) and another for Tier 2 (large-sized). In both cases,speed could be achieved by increasing processor capabilities or additional RAM —with the requirements below being the bare minimum required by the product. Please note that any version older than the specified or indeed not listed below must be assumed as not supported. Tier 1 — Small to medium-sized systems (up to 500 intersections) typesTACTICS installation Item Central (Server) D. Laptop Operating Windows Server 2012 R2 Windows Server 2012 Windows 7 64-bit Windows 7 64-bit System 64-bit R2 64-bit SQL Server MS SQL Server 2014 MS SQL Server 2014 NIA NIA Processor Intel Xeon E3 Intel Xeon E3 Inteli5 Inteli5 Memory 8GB RAM 8GB RAM 4GB RAM 8GB RAM Hard Disk 80GB 160GB 40GB 40GB Space Screen 1366x768 or higher 1366x768 or higher 1366x768 or higher 1366x768 or higher XGA and SXGA+active matrix display Peripherals Keyboard, mouse or Keyboard, mouse or Keyboard, mouse or Keyboard, mouse or compatible pointing device compatible pointing compatible pointing compatible pointing device device device Network Network adapter(1 Gbps) Network adapter Network adapter Network adapter (1 Gbps) (wireless) or 56k modem (optional) CD/DVD drive Required Required Optional Optional Web browser Internet Explorer 11 Internet Explorer 11 Internet Explorer 11 Internet Explorer 11 Table 2:Tier 1 -Minimum system requirements TACTICS' -System Requirements ©2018,Siemens Mobility,Inc. usa.siemens.com/intelligenttraffic TACTICSTM -System Requirements I r 2 — Large systems (over 500 intersections) TACTICS installation types Item Central,(Server) s. . .. Operating Windows Server 2012 R2 Windows Server 2012 Windows 7 64-bit Windows 7 64-bit System 64-bit R2 64-bit SQL Server MS SQL Server 2014 MS SQL Server 2014 N/A NIA Processor Intel Xeon E7 Intel Xeon E7 Intel i5 Intel i5 Memory 16GB RAM 16GB RAM 4GB RAM 8GB RAM Hard Disk 80GB 160GB 40GB 40GB Space Screen 1366x768 or higher 1366x768 or higher 1366x768 or higher 1366x768 or higher XGA and SXGA+active matrix display Peripherals Keyboard, mouse or Keyboard, mouse or Keyboard, mouse or Keyboard, mouse or compatible pointing device compatible pointing compatible pointing compatible pointing device device device Network Network adapter(2Gbps) Network adapter Network adapter Network adapter (2Gbps) (wireless) or 56k modem (optional) CD/DVD drive Required Required Optional Optional Web browser Internet Explorer 11 Internet Explorer 11 Internet Explorer 11 Internet Explorer 11 Table 3:Tier 2-Minimum system requirements TACTICSTm-System Requirements ©2018,Siemens Mobility,Inc. Exhibit C Preparation and Delivery of Electronic Engineering and Other Data In this Exhibit the agency, as applicable, is to provide a description of the format and standards the consultant is to use in preparing electronic files for transmission to the agency. The format and standards to be provided may include, but are not limited to, the following: I. Surveying, Roadway Design & Plans Preparation Section A. Survey Data n/a B. Roadway Design Files n/a C. Computer Aided Drafting Files n/a Agreement Number: Exhibit C-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/0112017 Page 1 of 4 D. Specify the Agency's Right to Review Product with the Consultant E. Specify the Electronic Deliverables to Be Provided to the Agency Adaptive system software; central system software and associated intersection and corridor program files. Software operations manuals. Training manuals. F. Specify What Agency Furnished Services and Information Is to Be Provided Citywide GIS mapping. Agreement Number: Exhibit C-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/0112017 Page 2 of 4 II. Any Other Electronic Files to Be Provided n/a III. Methods to Electronically Exchange Data Email for smaller items. Web based document sharing/download (e.g. ftp site). Exhibit C-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 1110112017 Page 3 of 4 A. Agency Software Suite MS Office 2010; Windows 10. B. Electronic Messaging System MS Outlook. C. File Transfers Format .pdf; .doex; other. Exhibit C-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/01/2017 Page 4 of 4 WesternSystems Exhibit D 11 Prime Consultant Cost Computations www,westernsystems-inc,com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, WA 98203 1 P:425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry a - '1 systems 12 PROJECT COST TABLE COST FOR SCOOT PROJECT-44 INTERSECTION Item # Description Qty Unit Unit Price Extended Price 1 Project Management 1 LS $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 Furnish and Install ASCT Central 2 System Software 1 LS $ 151,976.25 $ 1S1,976.25 Furnish and Install ASCT Central System Licensing (SCOOT) 3 1 LS $ 201,042.50 $ 201,042.50 Furnish and Install ASCT Central System Hardware (SCOOT& 4 TACTICS) 4 LS $ 4,333.33 $ 17,333.32 Furnish and Install ASCT Central System Software (TACTICS) 5 1 LS $ 89,045.00 $ 89,045.00 Furnish and Install ASCT Local 6 Controller Software 4 EA $ - INCLUDED Furnish and Install ASCT Local 7 Controller Licensing 44 EA $ - INCLUDED Furnish and Install ASCT Local g Controller Hardware 44 EA $ 4,393.74 $ 193,324.56 9 Review Existing Detection 1 LS $ 19,857.50 $ 19,857.70 Maintenance and Support (1 PER 10 Year) 1 YR $ 23,176.47 $ 23,176.47 System Testing, Configuration, Fine-Tuning and Verification 11 1 LS $ 142,575.00 $ 142,575.00 Maintenance and Support (4 PER 12 Years) 4 YR $ 23,176.47 $ 92,705.88 Training and Documentation 13 (min. 5 days training) 1 LS $ 13,125.00 $ 13,125.00 14 SCOOT Software License Pack 1 EA $ 36,025.00 $ 36,025.00 TOTAL $ 990,186.48 ��i�.jw,westernsystems-inc.com 11122 Industry Street, Bldg. B, Everett, SNA 98203 1 P:425.438.1133 The leader in providing innovative solutions, support and manufacturing for the transportation industry 1�-h Mbit E Sub-consultant Cost Computations There isn't any sub-consultant participation at this time. The CONSULTANT shall not sub-contract for the performance of any work under this AGREEMENT without prior written permission of the AGENCY. Refer to section VI "Sub-Contracting" of this AGREEMENT. Agreement Number: Exhibit E-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/01/2017 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit F Title VI Assurances During the performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT, for itself, its assignees, and successors in interest agrees as follows: 1. Compliance with Regulations: The CONSULTANT shall comply with the Regulations relative to non- discrimination in federally assisted programs of the AGENCY, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, as they may be amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the "REGULATIONS"), which are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this AGREEMENT. 2. Non-discrimination: The CONSULTANT, with regard to the work performed during this AGREEMENT, shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, sex, or national origin in the selection and retention of sub-consultants, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment. The CONSULTANT shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the REGULATIONS, including employment practices when this AGREEMENT covers a program set forth in Appendix B of the REGULATIONS. 3. Solicitations for Sub-consultants, Including Procurement of Materials and Equipment: In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiations made by the CONSULTANT for work to be performed under a sub-contract, including procurement of materials or leases of equipment, each potential sub- consultant or supplier shall be notified by the CONSULTANT of the CONSULTANT's obligations under this AGREEMENT and the REGULATIONS relative to non-discrimination on the grounds of race, color, sex, or national origin. 4. Information and Reports: The CONSULTANT shall provide all information and reports required by the REGULATIONS or directives issued pursuant thereto, and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the AGENCY, the STATE, or the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA) to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such REGULATIONS, orders and instructions. Where any information required of a CONSULTANT is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the CONSULTANT shall so certify to the AGENCY, the STATE, or the FHWA as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. 5. Sanctions for Non-compliance: In the event of the CONSULTANT's non-compliance with the non- discrimination provisions of this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall impose such AGREEMENT sanctions as it, the STATE, or the FHWA may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to: • Withholding of payments to the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT until the CONSULTANT complies, and/or; • Cancellation, termination, or suspension of this AGREEMENT, in whole or in part. 6. Incorporation of Provisions: The CONSULTANT shall include the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (5) in every subcontract, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the REGULATIONS, or directives issued pursuant thereto. The CONSULTANT shall take such action with respect to any sub-consultant or procurement as the STATE, the AGENCY, or FHWA may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for non-compliance. Provided, however, that in the event a CONSULTANT becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a sub-consultant or supplier as a result of such direction, the CONSULTANT may request the AGENCY enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the STATE and/or the AGENCY and, in addition, the CONSULTANT may request the United States enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. Agreement Number: Exhibit F-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/01/2017 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit G Certification Documents Exhibit G-1(a) Certification of Consultant Exhibit G-1(b) Certification of_ City of Federal Way Exhibit G-2 Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters - Primary Covered Transactions Exhibit G-3 Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying Exhibit G-4 Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data Agreement Number: Exhibit G-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11101/2017 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit G-1(a) Certification of Consultant I hereby certify that I am the and duly authorized representative of the firm of Western Systems, Inc. whose address is 1122 Industry Street Bldg B., Everett, WA 98203 and that neither the above firm nor I have: a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) to solicit or secure this AGREEMENT; b) Agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out this AGREEMENT; or c) Paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with, procuring or carrying out this AGREEMENT; except as hereby expressly stated(if any); I acknowledge that this certificate is to be furnished to the City of Federal Way and the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation in connection with this AGREEMENT involving participation of Federal-aid highway funds, and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws,both criminal and civil. Western Systems, Inc. Consultant(Firm Name) Signature(Authorized Official of Consultant) Date Agreement Number: Exhibit G-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/0112017 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit G-1(b) Certification of City of Federal Way I hereby certify that I am the: ❑� Mayor, Jim Ferrell Q Other of the City of Federal Way , and or its representative has not been required, directly or indirectly as an express or implied condition in connection with obtaining or carrying out this AGREEMENT to: a) Employ or retain, or agree to employ to retain, any firm or person; or b) Pay, or agree to pay, to any firm, person, or organization, any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind; except as hereby expressly stated(if any): I acknowledge that this certificate is to be fu mished to the WA State Dept of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, in connection with this AGREEMENT involving participation of Federal-aid highway funds, and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws,both criminal and civil. Signature Date Agreement Number: Exhibit G-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 1110112017 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit G-2 Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters - Primary Covered Transactions I. The prospective primary participant certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief, that it and its principals: A. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency; B. Have not within a three (3) year period preceding this proposal been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State anti-trust statues or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; C. Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, State, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph(1)(b) of this certification; and D. Have not within a three (3) year period preceding this application/proposal had one or more public transactions (Federal, State and local) terminated for cause or default. II. Where the prospective primary participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. Western Systems, Inc. Consultant(Firm Name) Signature(Authorized Official of Consultant) Date Agreement Number: Exhibit G-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/01/2017 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit G-3 Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying The prospective participant certifies, by signing and submitting this bid or proposal, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: 1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid,by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or any employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative AGREEMENT, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative AGREEMENT. 2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative AGREEMENT, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form- LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352,Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than$10,000.00, and not more than $100,000.00, for each such failure. The prospective participant also agrees by submitting his or her bid or proposal that he or she shall require that the language of this certification be included in all lower tier sub-contracts, which exceed$100,000, and that all such sub-recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. Western Systems, Inc. Consultant(Firm Name) Signature(Authorized Official of Consultant) Date Agreement Number: Exhibit G-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11101/2017 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit G-4 Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data This is to certify that,to the best of my knowledge and belief, the cost or pricing data (as defined in section 2.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and required under FAR subsection 15.403-4) submitted, either actually or by specific identification in writing, to the Contracting Officer or to the Contracting Officer's representative in support of Citywide Adaptive Traffic Control System * are accurate, complete, and current as of June 10, 2019 **. This certification includes the cost or pricing data supporting any advance AGREEMENT's and forward pricing rate AGREEMENT's between the offer or and the Government that are part of the proposal. Firm: Western Systems, Inc. Signature Title Date of Execution***: *Identify the proposal,quotation,request for pricing adjustment,or other submission involved,giving the appropriate identifying number(e.g.project title.) **Insert the day,month,and year,when price negotiations were concluded and price AGREEMENT was reached. ***Insert the day,month,and year,of signing,which should be as close as practicable to the date when the price negotiations were concluded and the contract price was agreed to. Agreement Number: Exhibit G-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/01/2017 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit I Alleged Consultant Design n-lor �- cedures The purpose of this exhibit is to establish a procedure to determine if a consultant's alleged design error is of a nature that exceeds the accepted standard of care. In addition, it will establish a uniform method for the resolution and/or cost recovery procedures in those instances where the agency believes it has suffered some material damage due to the alleged error by the consultant. Step 1 Potential Consultant Design Error(s) is Identified by Agency's Project Manager At the first indication of potential consultant design error(s), the first step in the process is for the Agency's project manager to notify the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer regarding the potential design error(s). For federally funded projects, the Region Local Programs Engineer should be informed and involved in these procedures. (Note: The Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer may appoint an agency staff person other than the project manager, who has not been as directly involved in the project, to be responsible for the remaining steps in these procedures.) Step 2 Project Manager Documents the Alleged Consultant Design Error(s) After discussion of the alleged design error(s) and the magnitude of the alleged error(s), and with the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer's concurrence, the project manager obtains more detailed documentation than is normally required on the project. Examples include: all decisions and descriptions of work; photographs, records of labor, materials and equipment. Step 3 Contact the Consultant Regarding the Alleged Design Error(s) If it is determined that there is a need to proceed further, the next step in the process is for the project manager to contact the consultant regarding the alleged design error(s) and the magnitude of the alleged error(s). The project manager and other appropriate agency staff should represent the agency and the consultant should be represented by their project manager and any personnel (including sub-consultants) deemed appropriate for the alleged design error(s) issue. Step 4 Attempt to Resolve Alleged Design Error with Consultant After the meeting(s) with the consultant have been completed regarding the consultant's alleged design error(s), there are three possible scenarios: • It is determined via mutual agreement that there is not a consultant design error(s). If this is the case, then the process will not proceed beyond this point. • It is determined via mutual agreement that a consultant design error(s) occurred. If this is the case, then the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer, or their representatives, negotiate a settlement with the consultant. The settlement would be paid to the agency or the amount would be reduced from the consultant's agreement with the agency for the services on the project in which the design error took place. The agency is to provide LP, through the Region Local Programs Engineer, a summary of the settlement for review and to make adjustments, if any, as to how the settlement affects federal reimbursements. No further action is required. • There is not a mutual agreement regarding the alleged consultant design error(s). The consultant may request that the alleged design error(s) issue be forwarded to the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer for review. If the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer, after review with their legal counsel, is not able to reach mutual agreement with the consultant, proceed to Step 5. Agreement Number: Exhibit I-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/01/2017 Page 1 of 2 Step 5 Forward Documents to Local Programs For federally funded projects all available information, including costs, should be forwarded through the Region Local Programs Engineer to LP for their review and consultation with the FHWA. LP will meet with representatives of the agency and the consultant to review the alleged design error(s), and attempt to find a resolution to the issue. If necessary, LP will request assistance from the Attorney General's Office for legal interpretation. LP will also identify how the alleged error(s) affects eligibility of project costs for federal reimbursement. • If mutual agreement is reached, the agency and consultant adjust the scope of work and costs to reflect the agreed upon resolution. LP, in consultation with FHWA, will identify the amount of federal participation in the agreed upon resolution of the issue. • If mutual agreement is not reached, the agency and consultant may seek settlement by arbitration or by litigation. Agreement Number: Exhibit I-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11101/2017 Page 2 of 2 . ibit J Consultant Clair Procedures The purpose of this exhibit is to describe a procedure regarding claim(s) on a consultant agreement. The following procedures should only be utilized on consultant claims greater than $1,000. If the consultant's claim(s) are a total of$1,000 or less, it would not be cost effective to proceed through the outlined steps. It is suggested that the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer negotiate a fair and reasonable price for the consultant's claim(s) that total $1,000 or less. This exhibit will outline the procedures to be followed by the consultant and the agency to consider a potential claim by the consultant. Step 1 Consultant Files a Claim with the Agency Project Manager If the consultant determines that they were requested to perform additional services that were outside of the agreement's scope of work, they may be entitled to a claim. The first step that must be completed is the request for consideration of the claim to the Agency's project manager. The consultant's claim must outline the following: • Summation of hours by classification for each firm that is included in the claim; • Any correspondence that directed the consultant to perform the additional work; • Timeframe of the additional work that was outside of the project scope; • Summary of direct labor dollars, overhead costs, profit and reimbursable costs associated with the additional work; and • Explanation as to why the consultant believes the additional work was outside of the agreement scope of work. Step 2 Review by Agency Personnel Regarding the Consultant's Claim for Additional Compensation After the consultant has completed step 1, the next step in the process is to forward the request to the Agency's project manager. The project manager will review the consultant's claim and will met with the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer to determine if the Agency agrees with the claim. If the FHWA is participating in the project's fimding, forward a copy of the consultant's claim and the Agency's recommendation for federal participation in the claim to the WSDOT Local Programs through the Region Local Programs Engineer. If the claim is not eligible for federal participation, payment will need to be from agency funds. If the Agency project manager,Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer, WSDOT Local Programs (if applicable), and FHWA(if applicable) agree with the consultant's claim, send a request memo, including backup documentation to the consultant to either supplement the agreement, or create a new agreement for the claim.After the request has been approved, the Agency shall write the supplement and/or new agreement and pay the consultant the amount of the claim. Inform the consultant that the final payment for the agreement is subject to audit. No further action in needed regarding the claim procedures. If the Agency does not agree with the consultant's claim, proceed to step 3 of the procedures. Agreement Number: Exhibit J-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 1110112017 Pagel of 2 Step 3 Preparation of Support Documentation Regarding Consultant's Claim(s) If the Agency does not agree with the consultant's claim, the project manager shall prepare a summary for the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer that included the following: • Copy of information supplied by the consultant regarding the claim; • Agency's summation of hours by classification for each firm that should be included in the claim; • Any correspondence that directed the consultant to perform the additional work; • Agency's summary of direct labor dollars, overhead costs,profit and reimbursable costs associated with the additional work; • Explanation regarding those areas in which the Agency does/does not agree with the consultant's claim(s); • Explanation to describe what has been instituted to preclude future consultant claim(s); and • Recommendations to resolve the claim. Step 4 Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer Reviews Consultant Claim and Agency Documentation The Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer shall review and administratively approve or disapprove the claim, or portions thereof, which may include getting Agency Council or Commission approval (as appropriate to agency dispute resolution procedures). If the project involves federal participation, obtain concurrence from WSDOT Local Programs and FHWA regarding final settlement of the claim. If the claim is not eligible for federal participation, payment will need to be from agency funds. Step 5 Informing Consultant of Decision Regarding the Claim The Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer shall notify(in writing) the consultant of their final decision regarding the consultant's claim(s). Include the final dollar amount of the accepted claim(s) and rationale utilized for the decision. Step 6 Preparation of Supplement or New Agreement for the Consultant's Claim(s) The agency shall write the supplement and/or new agreement and pay the consultant the amount of the claim. Inform the consultant that the final payment for the agreement is subject to audit. Agreement Number: Exhibit J-Local Agency Professional Services Lump Sum Consultant Agreement Revised 11/01/2017 Page 2 of 2 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: 6h CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR TRANSPORTATION GRANT POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council authorize staff to submit a grant application for a transportation project? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: July 1,2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Rick Perez,P.E.,City Traffic Engineer DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated July 1,2019. Options Considered: 1. Authorize staff to submit the proposed transportation grant application. 2. Do not authorize staff to submit the proposed transportation grant application and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S REC01Y['1ENDAT N: Option I. MAYOR APPROVAL: DIRECTOR APPROVAL: —z"l �ounIn cc C nc eitial/Date Initis[Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: "I move to forward Option 1 to the July 16, 2019 Council consent agenda for approval." MarkK p ngg onim11tce Chi Jesse Johnson, Committee Member Hoang'Tran,Committee member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize staff to submit the proposed transportation grant application." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED IST reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—12/2017 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1, 2019 TO: Land Use&Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell,Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E., Public Works Director Rick Perez, P.E., City Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: Authorization to Apply for Transportation Grant FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This project would require the City to provide $1,000,000 in match towards the grant. The required City match for this grant will be provided from the Real Estate Excise Tax and Traffic Impact Fees. Operational expenses include small increases for additional street lighting and landscaping, which would be addressed in future operating budgets upon completion of the project in 2022. BACKGROUND: This memorandum provides the Council with the current status of new grant funding programs for transportation improvement projects. Staff has evaluated all projects listed on the City's current and draft Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and concluded that the following project will likely be competitive in the 2019 Transportation Improvement Board funding cycle. Project (Funding Phase) Estimated Project Cost Possible Grant Funds Required City Grant I Match SR 99 @ S 373"' Street—Roundabout and Access Management (Design,Right-of-Way, and Construction) TIB Urban Arterial Program $2,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 (State Funds) COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: 61 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES—CONTRACT AWARD POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute a contract with Waste Management of Washington,Inc. for collection of garbage,recyclables, and compostables? COMMITTEE:LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION MEETING DATE: 7/1/2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Rob Van Orsow, Solid Waste& Recycling Coo dPW Attachments: Memorandum to Land Use& Transportation Co ittee Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Services Contract Options Considered: 1. Authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute a contract with Waste Management of Washington, Inc. for collection of garbage,recyclables,and compostables. 2.Do not authorize entering into a contract with Waste Management of Washington,Inc. and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the July 16, 2019 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. / MAYOR APPROVAL: �R,G (a $ �� W DIRECTOR APPROVAL: Z'(I I Committee Council !n tis!Date Initis UDate Initia UDate COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:I move to forward Option 1 to the July 16, 2019 consent agenda for approval. Co ttee Chair C mmittee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval to authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute a contract with Waste Management of Washington, Inc.for collection of garbage, recyclables, and compostables." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—4/2019 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 16, 2019 TO: City Council VIA: Jim Fare�ll�Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E.,Public Works Director Rob Van Orsow, Solid Waste&Recycling Coordinator=::-_�a,,..�.3...✓ SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SER VICES—CONTRA CTA WARD BACKGROUND Following the Land Use&Transportation Committee meeting of July 1, 2019, discussions with Waste Management of Washington,Inc. were completed to finalize the new solid waste collection contract. The contract has also been formatted for correct pagination, and has completed internal review by the Law Department. Highlights of final changes follow. Re\isions to P,�:cv�:Ijnu hl irkcl . di-ushiient Process (Commodity Cred-its/Debits) Section 5.3.4 was edited to reflect the finalization discussions to date. While both parties agree about concepts for calculating and apportioning credits/debits,we were unable to agree to a protocol. Rather than commit to a potentially imperfect protocol,both sides agreed to simply state the agreed-to foundations that the protocol will be based on,which will guide developing a mutually acceptable protocol in the coming months.This made Exhibit G unnecessary, so it was removed from the contract. Section 4.3.3 Customer Billing The initial paragraph was revised to allow the contractor to avoid providing"close-out" invoices at the end of the current contract. The contractor's billing system cannot accommodate that approach. The City will require the contractor to plan for a transition from invoicing under the old rates to the new rates that minimizes confusion or burden on ratepayers. To facilitate contract finalization,this issue will be addressed via development and approval of the contractor's transition and implementation plan. SUMMARY The attached finalized contract replaces the draft contract version included in the July 1, 2019 Land Use &Transportation Committee packet. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1, 2019 TO: Land Use&Transportation Committee VIA: Jim Ferrell, Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E., Public Works Director Rob Van Orsow, Solid Waste&Recyclin Coordinatof-1� SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES-CONTRACT AWARD FINANCIAL IMPACTS The City of Federal Way is conducting a procurement process for the next Solid Waste Collection Services Contract. The review process has determined that Waste Management of Washington, Inc. is the lowest cost, responsive, responsible proponent. Pending City Council's direction, a contract would be awarded to the proponent resulting in ratepayer costs totaling approximately$16M in the first year. BACKGROUND The City of Federal Way has contracted with Waste Management of Washington, Inc. (WM)for the collection of residential and commercial solid waste since 1999.This current contract expires August 31, 2020.The City has not undergone a competitive solid waste contract procurement since 2001.WM was the successful bidder in the 2001 process. In preparation for procuring a new contract, the City Council adopted Council Resolution 18-740 in August 2018, directing preparation of a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP)process to procure the City's next solid waste collection contract. At the October 16, 2018 Special City Council Meeting,the City Council reviewed results from a garbage and recycling service preferences survey conducted in September 2018. Then, at the November 20,2018 City Council Meeting,the City Council authorized release of an RFP to solicit these services, including seeking pricing on various service alternatives to allow the City flexibility to determine how these alternatives impact rates. City Council authorization launched the"Industry Review Process" wherein area hauling companies were asked to provide input on the draft services contract and the draft proposal instructions.The results were incorporated, as appropriate,throughout the base contract and into the final RFP,which was released January 22, 2019. Three addenda followed,responding to further proponent questions and clarifying data on system tonnages and customer counts. On April 15, 2019, three proposals were received in response to the RFP. Recology, Republic, and Waste Management submitted proposals, all of which were determined to be responsive. PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS Throughout the process of preparing contract documents, evaluating and incorporating proponent comments and evaluating proposals,participating City staff observed the following principles: • Ensure compliance with purchasing procedures, and follow City Council directions related to the proposal process July 1,2019 Land ITse and Transportation Committee Award of Contract—Solid Waste Collection Services Page 2 • Encourage participation by potential proponents, incorporating process integrity, fairness, and transparency throughout the process • Attain optimal services and value for Federal Way's residents and businesses, and • Support policies established in the King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. Per the City Council authorized K P,the proposals were evaluated based upon pricing(60 points) and qualitative elements(40 points).The 60:40 split recognizes the importance of cost while acknowledging qualitative elements (such as customer service) are also important to ratepayers. However, the overarching goal is to seek quality service at the best price for Federal Way ratepayers. Quantitative Evaluation(60 Points): Quantitative evaluation of proposed service rates was completed by the City's consultant,with scoring based on the proponents' proposed fees for providing the services as specified in the base contract. Scoring appears as "Service Fee Evaluation" in Table 1. Qualitative Evaluation(40 Points): Qualitative evaluation was completed by two separate City staff teams. The first team reviewed and scored the written proposals,while the second team conducted site visits of proponent facilities and also conducted interviews with proponent representatives. Qualitative conring appears ll'1"Prnpnsal Evaluat.nn" awnij "TntPi-6-NXT& Cite%Ijgytg" in Tahla 1. CONTRACT EXCEPTIONS AND ERRATA The City made inquiries seeking to clarify two of the proposals: • Recology was asked to assign dollar amounts to their declared contract exceptions to allow their proposed rates to be compared on equal terms with the other two proponents. • Republic was asked about their proposal's assignment of a negative value per aggregate toil of processed recyclable material, and Republic confirmed that was their intention. Neither of these clarifications involves dollars amounts large enough to change the Service Fee Evaluation ranking for the three proponents. SCORING SUMMARY The following table includes highlights showing the highest score for each evaluation element. The highest overall snore results in the recommendation to award the contract to Waste Management of Washington, Inc. as lowest cost responsive, responsible proponent. Table 1 —Proponent Scores Element Weight Recology Republic Waste Management Service Fee Evaluation 60% 56.9 55.6 60.0 Proposal Evaluation 35% 30.1 18.2 28.0 Interview& Site Visits 1 5% 1 4.3 1 3.0 3.8 WEIGHTED TOTAL 100% 91.3 76.8 91.8 Based on the overall scoring,the Mayor directed contract finalization discussions to ensure that additional services specified in WM's proposal would be set via the contract. The result is the attached draft contract. July 1,2019 Land Use and Transportation Committee Award of Contract—Solid Waste Collection Services Page 3 HIGHLIGHTS OF THE NEW CONTRACT AND SERVICES • All new carts for garbage, recycling, and compostables collection services,with updated decals/embossing • One no-cost annual bulky waste collection per single-family resident(modeled after Tacoma's "Call-2-Haul"program) • Set lower fees for bulky item collection(augmenting the annual bulky waste collection) • Set pricing for contractor services for public area litter cans(fee-based) • Set flat fee for Event Services(Cart-based services provided for all three"wastestreams"- garbage,recyclables, and compostables) • Recycling market price changes reflected in future rate adjustments and itemized on customer bills—at contract start,the recycling commodity credit is set at$1.00/month per residence • No-cost supplementary storm debris collection(for yard waste subscribers) following City- declared events • Transition to fully-automated residential collection services(all regular services utilize wheeled carts), increasing collection efficiency and reducing the cost of services • Shifting the City's administrative fee to a percentage of revenues rather than a flat rate BENEFITS SPECIFIC TO WASTE MANAGEMENT'S PROPOSAL Early service enhancements and programs (starting September 1,2019) • A Federal Way-only Customer Service Team(Four dedicated staff: two supervisors plus two floor leads)to oversee Federal Way customer calls.These staff will have extensive local knowledge and ease the transition to Federal Way's new Dedicated Call Queue(accessed via the City's original garbage service phone number: 253-833-3333).The Dedicated Call Queue will allow tracking of speed to answer and hold time data specifically for Federal Way.The Queue will also feature a Federal Way-focused greeting. • Extended Saturday Customer Service Center Hours (8 a.m.to 5 p.m.). • 0.4 FTE dedicated Education and Outreach Staff, locally based at WM's operations yard in Auburn,to augment City outreach and service compliance efforts. Additional Proposed Service enhancements(coinciding with the new contract starting September, 2020) • All new fleet of"Smart Trucks" (designed to scan set-outs for compliance during collection— helping focus outreach to customers as needed) featuring"Near Zero"emissions engines powered by renewable natural gas-powered engines • Annual small-scale Recycling Collection Events targeting specific hard to recycle items (details TBD) • Installation and ongoing servicing for six litter compactors(these trash cans self-monitor and send data to the contractor whenever emptying is required).Litter compactors will be installed in City-specified high pedestrian traffic locations in the first year of the new contract. • Transition to"wage parity" for route drivers(recyclables, compostables, and garbage drivers will be compensated on the same scale) • Several new education and outreach programs, to be developed and implemented in collaboration with the City • Setting benchmarks to evaluate the effectiveness of outreach and services,to inform future outreach and create more impactful programs July 1,2019 Land Use and Transportation Committee Award of Contract—Solid WasLe Collection Services Page 4 SERVICE ALTERNATIVES The RFP included nine service alternatives for proponents to cost-out.This allowed the City to test the competitive market for cost-effective options to better serve ratepayers.Five alternatives were rejected outright,due to higher costs or lack of compelling benefits, including: • Allowing the Hauler to use older collection trucks at contract start(would not reduce rates) • Establishing a `billing agent' system to accrue revenues via a Utility Fund(not cost-effective) • Two substitute annual rate escalators("buying down"initial rates would result in excessive rate increases in later years) • Adding the cost of unlimited commercial recycling services into rates(not cost-effective in this procurement scenario) The"base contract"(included in the RFP)included three residential service enhancements based on feedback from the survey and City Council,while three matching service alternatives were added to allow reversing the enhancements.These three service improvements included: • Shifting subscription-based compostables collection to"embedded" so this service is provided to all single-family customers as part of their garbage service • Shifting from quarterly to monthly invoicing • Shifting from every-other-week to weekly curbside recycling collection The matching alternatives show that reversing these service improvements means significant savings, reducing garbage rates by almost 19%for single-family customers, so staff recommends accepting the three alternatives and reversing these service enhancements.The attached contract and rates have been revised based on acceptance of these alternatives. The ninth alternative tested the cost of mandatory sign-up for residential garbage collection. If the City were to adopt changes to Federal Way Revised Code(FWRC)requiring all single-family residents to enroll in garbage collection services, it would increase residential service rates under the new contract. The initial cost per residence would be $5.64 per year.This higher cost is due in part to increased bad debt for services provided to residents who neglect to pay. Mandatory service sign-up does not mitigate for issues such as illegal dumping of bulky items and roadside litter.For example: Tacoma, Auburn, and Seattle all have mandatory service sign-ups,but still have to operate litter control programs to manage illegal dumping.Due to the resulting rate increase but limited impact on dumping issues, staff recommends rejection of this alternative.The attached contract and rates are based on the rejection of the mandatory service sign-up alternative. COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL RATES Annual rate adjustments will occur automatically beginning January 1, 2021, sixteen months into the new contract.The rate change process is similar to the current contract which consists of two elements: the cost for service(operational costs), and the cost for disposal. Inflation changes will apply only to the "service"component of rates.The"disposal"component of rates only changes when King County sets tipping fees for garbage disposal.New to this contract is a `commodity credit' reflecting the value of the mix of materials that ratepayers recycle. The commodity credit adjusts annually based on an independent published market index.The credit will be applied to customer rates prior to calculation of any fees or taxes. July 1,2019 Land Use and Transportation Committee Award of Contract-Solid Waste Collection Services Page 5 Commercial Rates: Under the new contract,nonresidential rates are equalized, meaning multi-family and commercial rates will be the same. Since both customer types will continue to receive the benefit of various `no-cost' recycling services, this rate equalization is reasonable and will simplify billing(for example in the case of `mixed use' properties). These retail rates would come into effect September 1, 2020. Table 2 -Monthly Commercial and N ulti-Family Service Rates (Effective 9/1/2020-12/31/2021) Service 1 evel(examples) Current Rate New Contract Rate 1 cubic yard, Ix/week Commercial: $99.05 $117.08 Multi-Family: $115.99 2 cubic yard, 1 x/week Commercial: $166.45 $196.77 Multi-Family: $205.09 4 cubic yard, lx/week Commercial: $295.60 $349.45 Multi-Family: $348.16 Drop Box-20 yard uncompacted(per haul) Commercial: $221.50 $288.49 including monthly rent) Multi-Family: $268.53 Compactor-20 cubic yard(per haul) Commercial: $210.32 $248.63 Multi-Family: $256.55 Residential Rates: Under the new contract per the alternatives above,the following retail rates would come into effect September 1, 2020. Existing rates are included for comparison. These new rates include all the benefits and added services built into the new contract, and assume that the City Council concurs with accepting three alternatives and rejecting one alternative as outlined above. Table 3-Monthly Residential Service Rates (Fffective 9/1/2020-12/31/20.21) New Contract Rate Service Level Current Rate (including$1.00 commodity credit) 32-gallon Garbage Can(lx/month) $7.84 10-gallon Garbage Micro-can (Discontinuing) $8.05 $ 9.83 20- allon Garbage Cart $11.87 $ 15.32 32-gallon Garbage Can (Discontinuing) $19.44 $ 20.41 35-gallon Garbage Cart $21.62 64-gallon Garbage Cart $29.54 $ 30.32 96-gallon Garbage Cart 1 $39.65 $ 45.16 96-gallon Yard Waste Cart $11.36 $ 11.96 SUMMARY Staff recommends that the City Council vote to award the Solid Waste Collection Services Contract resulting from the RFP and proposal evaluation process to Waste Management of Washington, Inc.In doing so,the City Council would approve the following actions: • Authorize the Mayor to finalize and enter into a new contract with Waste Management of Washington, Inc. the lowest cost, responsive, responsible proponent. July 1,2019 Land Use and Transportation Committee Award of Contract—Solid Waste Collection Services Page 6 • Accept proponent alternatives that maintain current general single-family residential services levels at slightly lower rates,per the City Council's determination this is the appropriate single- family residential service level. • Maintain"subscription based"service sign-ups(reject the proponent alternative for an additional fee to support Mandatory Collection Service sign-ups). CITY OF Federal Centered on Opportunity COMPREHENSIVE GARBAGE, RECYCLABLES, AND COM POSTABLES COLLECTION SERVICES CONTRACT City of Federal Way and Waste Management of Washington, Inc. September 1, 2020 — September 30, 2030 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Collection Services Contract Table of Contents RECITALS ............................................................................................................................................1 AGREEMENT.......................................................................................................................................1 1. DEFINITIONS...................................................................................................................................1 2.TERM OF CONTRACT .......................................................................................................................6 3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES.......................................................................6 4. SCOPE OF WORK.............................................................................................................................7 4.1 GENERAL COLLECTION SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS..............................................................................................7 4.1.1 Service Area...................................................................................................................................7 4.1.2 Service to Residences on Private Roads and Driveways................................................................8 4.1.3 Hours/Days of Collection...............................................................................................................8 4.1.4 Employee Conduct.........................................................................................................................8 4.1.5 Disabled Persons Service...............................................................................................................9 4.1.6 Holiday Schedules..........................................................................................................................9 4.1.7 Inclement Weather........................................................................................................................9 4.1.8 Suspending Collection from Problem Customers.........................................................................11 4.1.9 Missed Collections.......................................................................................................................11 4.1.10 Some Day Collection..................................................................................................................12 4.1.11 Requirement to Recycle and Compost and Quality Assurance..................................................12 4.1.12 Routing, Notification, and Approval..........................................................................................13 4.1.13 Vehicle and Equipment Type/Age/Condition/Use.....................................................................13 4.1.14 Container Requirements and Ownership..................................................................................15 4.1.14.1 Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Carts..............................................................15 4.1.14.2 Detachable Containers and Drop-box Containers...........................................................16 4.1.14.3 Ownership.........................................................................................................................17 4.1.14.4 Container Colors and Labeling..........................................................................................18 4.1.14.5 Container Weights ............................................................................................................18 4.1.14.6 Container Removal Upon City or Customer Request.......................................................18 4.1.15 Inventory of Vehicles and Facilities...........................................................................................19 4.1.16 Spillage and Leakage of Vehicle Contents.................................................................................19 4.1.17 Disruption Due to Construction.................................................................................................20 4.1.18 Contractor Labor Negotiations, Strike Contingency Planning, and Performance During Labor Disruption.............................................................................................................................................20 4.1.19 Site Planning and Building Design Review................................................................................22 4.1.20 Safeguarding Public and Private Facilities................................................................................23 4.1.21 Transition and Implementation of Contract..............................................................................23 4.1.22 Performance Review..................................................................................................................24 4.1.23 Continual Monitoring and Evaluation of Operations................................................................24 4.1.24 Collection/Disposal Restrictions................................................................................................25 4.1.25 Emergency Response.................................................................................................................26 4.1.26 Early Implementation................................................................................................................26 4.2 COLLECTION SERVICES..............................................................................................................................26 4.2.1 Single-Family Residence Garbage Collection...............................................................................26 4.2.1.1 Subject Materials................................................................................................................26 City of Federal Way ii July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Collection Services Contract Table of Contents 4.2.1.2 Containers...........................................................................................................................26 4.2.1.3 Specific Collection Requirements.......................................................................................26 4.2.2 Single-Family Residence Recyclables Collection..........................................................................27 4.2.2.1 Recyclable Materials...........................................................................................................27 4.2.2.2 Containers...........................................................................................................................28 4.2.2.3 Specific Collection Requirements.......................................................................................28 4.2.3 Single-Family Residence Compostables Collection......................................................................28 4.2.3.1 Subject Materials................................................................................................................28 4.2.3.2 Containers...........................................................................................................................29 4.2.3.3 Specific Collection Requirements.......................................................................................29 4.2.4 Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customer Garbage Collection........................................30 4.2.4.1 Subject Materials................................................................................................................30 4.2.4.2 Containers...........................................................................................................................30 4.2.4.3 Specific Collection Requirements.......................................................................................30 4.2.5 Multifamily Complex and Commercial Recyclables Collection....................................................31 4.2.5.1 Subject Materials................................................................................................................31 4.2.5.2 Containers ...........................................................................................................................31 4.2.5.3 Specific Collection Requirements.......................................................................................32 4.2.6 Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customer Compostables Collection ...............................32 4.2.6.1 Subject Materials................................................................................................................32 4.2.6.2 Containers ...........................................................................................................................33 4.2.6.3 Specific Collection Requirements.......................................................................................33 4.2.7 Drop-Box Container Garbage Collection.....................................................................................33 4.2.7.1 Subject Materials................................................................................................................33 4.2.7.2 Containers ...........................................................................................................................33 4.2.7.3 Specific Collection Requirements.......................................................................................34 4.2.8 Temporary(Non-Special Event) Container Customers................................................................34 4.2.9 Special Event Services..................................................................................................................34 4.2.10 City Services...............................................................................................................................35 4.2.11 Community Events.....................................................................................................................37 4.2.12 On-call Bulky Waste Collection..................................................................................................37 4.2.13 Excluded Services.......................................................................................................................37 4.3 COLLECTION SUPPORTAND MANAGEMENT......................................................................................37 4.3.1 General Customer Service...........................................................................................................38 4.3.2 Specific Customer Service Requirements.....................................................................................38 4.3.2.1 Customer Service Representative Staffing.........................................................................39 4.3.2.2 City Access to Contractor's Customer Service Information...............................................39 4.3.2.3 Service Recipient Complaints and Corrective Requests....................................................39 4.3.2.4 Handling of Customer Calls.................................................................................................40 4.3.2.5 Corrective Measures...........................................................................................................40 4.3.2.6 Contractor Internet Website ..............................................................................................41 4.3.2.7 Full Knowledge of Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Programs Required...........41 4.3.2.8 Customer Communications ................................................................................................42 4.3.3 Contractor's Customer Billing Responsibilities............................................................................42 4.3.4 Reporting.....................................................................................................................................44 4.3.4.1 Monthly Reports.................................................................................................................44 City of Federal Way iii July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Collection Services Contract Table of Contents 4.3.4.2 Annual Reports....................................................................................................................46 4.3.4.3 Ad Hoc Reports....................................................................................................................46 4.3.4.4 Other Reports......................................................................................................................47 4.3.5 Promotion and Education............................................................................................................47 4.3.6 Transition to Next Contractor......................................................................................................49 5. COMPENSATION ...........................................................................................................................49 5.1 COMPENSATION TO THE CONTRACTOR........................................................................................................49 5.1.1 Rates............................................................................................................................................49 5.1.2 Itemization on Invoices................................................................................................................50 5.2 COMPENSATION TO THE CITY ....................................................................................................................51 5.3 COMPENSATION ADJUSTMENTS.................................................................................................................51 5.3.1 Annual CPI Service Component Modification..............................................................................51 5.3.2 Changes in Disposal Fees.............................................................................................................52 5.3.3 Changes in Disposal or Compostables Processing Sites..............................................................52 5.3.4 Recycling Market Adjustments....................................................................................................53 5.3.5 New or Changes in Existing Taxes...............................................................................................54 5.4 CHANGE IN LAW......................................................................................................................................54 6. FAILURE TO PERFORM, REMEDIES,TERMINATION..........................................................................54 6.1 PERFORMANCE FEES................................................................................................................................54 6.2 CONTRACT DEFAULT................................................................................................................................57 7. NOTICES........................................................................................................................................59 8. GENERAL TERMS...........................................................................................................................59 8.1 COLLECTION RIGHT..................................................................................................................................59 8.2 ACCESS TO RECORDS................................................................................................................................60 8.3 INSURANCE.............................................................................................................................................60 8.3.1 Minimum Scope of Insurance......................................................................................................60 8.3.2 Minimum Amounts of Insurance.................................................................................................61 8.3.3 Other Insurance Provisions..........................................................................................................61 8.3.4 Acceptability of Insurers..............................................................................................................62 8.3.5 Verification of Coverage..............................................................................................................62 8.3.6 Subcontractors............................................................................................................................62 8.4 PERFORMANCE BOND..............................................................................................................................62 8.5 INDEMNIFICATION...................................................................................................................................63 8.5.1 Defend, Indemnify and Hold Harmless........................................................................................63 8.5.2 Process.........................................................................................................................................63 8.6 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION ...........................................................................................................64 8.7 ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT......................................................................................................................64 8.7.1 Assignment or Pledge of Money by the Contractor....................................................................64 8.7.2 Assignment, Subcontracting, Delegation of Duties.....................................................................64 8.7.3 Change of Trade Name................................................................................................................65 8.8 LAWS TO GOVERN/VENUE........................................................................................................................65 8.9 COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS .............................................................................65 8.10 PERMITS AND LICENSES..........................................................................................................................66 City of Federal Way iv July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Collection Services Contract Table of Contents 8.11 RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES......................................................................................................................66 8.12 CONTRACTOR'S RELATIONSHIP WITH CUSTOMERS.......................................................................................66 8.13 BANKRUPTCY........................................................................................................................................67 8.14 RIGHTTO RENEGOTIATE/AMEND.............................................................................................................67 8.15 FORCE MAJEURE...................................................................................................................................67 8.16 SEVERABILITY........................................................................................................................................68 8.17 WAIVER...............................................................................................................................................68 8.18 INCORPORATION OF CONTRACTOR'S PROPOSAL IN RESPONSE TO CITY'S RFP..................................................68 8.19 DISPUTE RESOLUTION ............................................................................................................................68 8.20 ENTIRETY.............................................................................................................................................69 EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT A: Service Area EXHIBIT B: Early Start of Service Support EXHIBIT C: Recyclables List EXHIBIT D: Service Support Resource Levels EXHIBIT E: Contractor Rates EXHIBIT F: Rate Modification Example City of Federal Way v July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract This Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Collection Services Contract (hereafter, "Contract"), passed by the Federal Way City Council at its regular meeting on the day of 2019. This Contract is made and entered into this day of , 2019 (hereafter the "Date of Execution"), by and between the City of Federal Way, a municipal corporation (hereafter "City"), and Waste Management of Washington, Inc. (hereafter"Contractor"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the City has conducted a competitive process to select a contractor to provide Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables collection services to all residents, businesses, and institutions located within the Service Area; and WHEREAS, the Contractor, having participated in the competitive process, acknowledges that the City conducted a thorough and exhaustive competitive process; and WHEREAS, the Contractor, having participated in the competitive process, acknowledges that the City had the right at any time during the process to reject any or all of the competitors, regardless of their proposals or prices; and WHEREAS, having completed the competitive process, the City has selected the best candidate to provide the services outlined in the competitive process; and WHEREAS, the Contractor represents and warrants that it has the experience, resources, and expertise necessary to perform the services as requested in the competitive process; and WHEREAS, the City desires to enter into this Contract with the Contractor for the services outlined in the competitive process and included below; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, agreements, and promises herein contained,the City and Contractor do agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. DEFINITIONS The following definitions apply to terms used in this Contract: Bulky Waste: Discrete items of Garbage of a size or shape that precludes collection in regular collection containers. Bulky Waste includes: large appliances (such as refrigerators, freezers, stoves, dishwashers, clothes washing machines or dryers), water heaters, furniture (such as chairs or sofas), televisions, mattresses, and other similar large items placed at the Curb as discrete separate items. Bulky Waste does not include piles of debris, car parts, construction or demolition debris, any item that would be considered Hazardous Waste, or stumps. City of Federal Way 1 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Can:A Customer-owned Container that is a water-tight, galvanized sheet-metal or plastic container, not exceeding four (4) cubic feet or thirty-two (32) gallons in capacity; fitted with two (2) sturdy looped handles, one on each side; and fitted with a tight cover equipped with a handle. Cart: A Contractor-provided 20-, 35, 64-, or 96-gallon wheeled Container with attached lid suitable for collection, storage, and Curbside placement of Garbage, Recyclables, or Compostables. Cart size variations up to ten percent (10%) are allowable with prior written permission from the City. Carts shall be rodent and insect resistant. Change of Control: The term "Change of Control" means any single transaction or series of related transactions by which the beneficial ownership of more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting securities of the Contractor is acquired by a person or entity, or by a related or affiliated group of persons or entities, who as of the effective date of the Contract do not have such a beneficial interest; provided, however, that intra-company transfers, such as transfers between different subsidiaries or branches of the parent corporation of the Contractor, or transfers to corporations, limited partnerships, or any other entity owned or controlled by the Contractor upon the effective date of the Contract, and transactions effected on any securities exchange registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, shall not constitute a Change in Control. City: The word "City" means the City of Federal Way, in King County, Washington. As used in the Contract, use of the term "City" may include reference to the Mayor or his/her designated representative(s). Where the context makes it apparent, references to staff, streets, rights-of-way, activities and things refer to the staff, streets, rights-of-way and activities of the City, and things belonging to or located within the City. Commercial Customer: Non-Residential Customers, including businesses, institutions, governmental agencies, and all other users of commercial-type Garbage collection services. Compostables: Any organic waste material that is Source-separated for processing or composting, such as Yard Debris and Food Scraps generated by any Residential or Commercial customers. Contamination Reduction Plan: The plan developed by the Contractor and annually approved by the City to address contamination in Recyclables and Compostables placed in Customers' Containers. Contamination includes improperly prepared Recyclables and/or Compostables, materials that cannot be recycled or composted, and excessive moisture. Contractor: Waste Management of Washington, Inc., which has contracted with the City to provide all Services identified in this Contract, including, but not limited to, collecting, transporting, and disposing of Garbage and collecting, processing, marketing, and transporting Recyclables and Compostables. Container: Any Can, Cart, Detachable Container, or Drop-box Container used in the performance of this Contract. Contract: Refers to this contract for comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostable collection services. City of Federal Way 2 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Contract Term: Refers to the term of this Contract as provided for in Section 2. County: King County in Washington State. Curb or Curbside: Refers to the Customers' property, within five (5) feet of the Public Street or Private Road (or on the sidewalk without completely obstructing the sidewalk, if there is no Customer property within five (5) feet of the Public Street or Private Road) without blocking driveways or on-street parking. If extraordinary circumstances preclude such a location, Curbside shall be considered a placement suitable to the Customer, convenient to the Contractor's equipment, and mutually agreed to by the City and Contractor. Customer:All account-holders and users of the Contractor's services within the City. Date of Commencement of Service: September 1, 2020, which is the date that the Contractor agrees to commence the provision of Services as described throughout this Contract, notwithstanding the early service improvements referenced in Section 4.3 and Exhibit B. Date of Execution:The date that this Contract is executed by all signatories. Day/Days: Calendar days unless otherwise specified. Detachable Container: A watertight metal or plastic container equipped with a tight-fitting cover, capable of being mechanically unloaded into a collection vehicle, and that is not less than one (1) cubic yard or greater than eight (8) cubic yards in capacity. Driveway: A privately-owned and maintained way that connects a Single-Family Residence or parking area/garage/carport with a Private Road or Public Street. Drop-box Container: An all-metal loose material or compactor container with ten (10) cubic yards or more capacity that is loaded onto a specialized collection vehicle. Environmental Law:Any applicable federal, state, or local statute, code, or ordinance or federal or state administrative rule, regulation, ordinance, order, decree, or other governmental authority as now or at any time hereafter in effect pertaining to the protection of human health or the environment Extra Unit: Excess material that does not fit in the Customer's primary Container. In the case of Garbage and Compostables Cart services, an Extra Unit is 32-gallons and may be contained in either a plastic bag or Can. In the case of Garbage Containers one (1) cubic yard or more in capacity, an Extra Unit is 96- gallons. Food Scraps: All compostable pre- and post-consumer food waste, such as whole or partial pieces of produce, meats, bones, cheese, bread, cereals, coffee grounds, or egg shells, and food-soiled paper, such as paper napkins, paper towels, paper plates, coffee filters, paper take-out boxes, pizza boxes, or other paper products accepted by the Contractor's selected composting site. Food Scraps shall not include dead animals, plastics, diapers, cat litter, liquid wastes, ashes, pet wastes, or other materials prohibited by the selected composting facility. The range of materials handled by the Compostables City of Federal Way 3 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract collection program may be changed from time to time upon the mutual agreement of the Parties to reflect those materials allowed by the jurisdictional health department for the frequency of collection provided by the Contractor. Garbage: All putrescible and non-putrescible solid and semi-solid wastes, including, but not limited to, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, swill, demolition and construction wastes, dead small animals completely wrapped in plastic and weighing less than fifteen (15) pounds, and discarded commodities that are placed by Customers in appropriate Containers, bags, or other receptacles for collection and disposal by the Contractor. Needles or "sharps" used for the administration of medication can be included in the definition of "Garbage," provided that they are placed within a sealed, secure container as agreed upon by the City and the Contractor and this handling is consistent with current County sharps policy. The term "Garbage" shall not include Hazardous Wastes, Source-separated recyclable materials, or Source-separated Compostables. Hazardous Waste: Any hazardous, toxic, or dangerous waste, or material, or contaminant, pollutant, or chemical, known or unknown, defined or identified as such in any existing or future local, state, or federal law, statute, code, ordinance, rule, regulation, guideline, decree, or order relating to human health or the environment or environmental conditions, including but not limited to any substance that is: A. Defined as hazardous by 40 C.F.R. Part 261.3 and regulated as hazardous waste by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA") of 1976, 42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq., as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments ("HSWA") of 1984; the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq., as may be amended; or any other federal statute or regulation governing the treatment, storage, handling, or disposal of waste imposing special handling or disposal requirements similar to those required by Subtitle C of RCRA; B. Defined as dangerous or extremely hazardous by WAC 173-303-040, as may be amended, and regulated as dangerous waste or extremely hazardous waste by the Washington State Department of Ecology under the State Hazardous Waste Management Act, Chapter 70.105 RCW, or any other Washington State statute, regulation or rule governing the treatment, storage, handling, or disposal of wastes and imposing special handling requirements similar to those required by Chapter 70.105 RCW; and C. Any substance that comes within the scope of this definition as determined by the City after the Date of Execution of this Contract. Any substance that ceases to fall within this definition as determined by the City after the Date of Execution of this Contract shall not be deemed to be Hazardous Waste. King County Disposal System: The facilities owned, leased, or controlled by King County, Washington for the disposal of Garbage, or such other site as may be authorized by the current King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and the Interlocal Agreement between the City and King County. City of Federal Way 4 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Mixed-Use Building: A structure inhabited by both Residential and Commercial Customers. Multifamily Complex: A multiple-unit Residence with four(4) or more attached or unattached dwellings billed collectively for collection service. Office Hours: The hours of 8:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., Pacific Standard Time, Monday through Friday except for the holiday schedule specified in Section 4.1.6. On-call: The provision of specified services only upon direct telephone, written, or e-mailed request of the Customer to the Contractor. Party: Either the City or the Contractor. Parties:The City and Contractor. Private Road: A privately-owned and maintained way that allows for access by a collection vehicle. Public Street: A public right-of-way used for public travel, including public alleys. Recycling: The preparation, collection,transport, processing, and marketing of Recyclables. Recyclables: The materials designated as being part of a Residential or Commercial Recycling collection program, as listed in Exhibit C. Residence/Residential: A single-family and/or multifamily dwelling individually rented, leased, or owned. Services: Refers to the comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables and Compostables collection and processing services provided by the Contractor pursuant to this Contract. Service Area: The service boundaries indicated in Exhibit A as of the Date of Commencement of Service, which shall be the City's corporate boundaries. Single-Family Residence: All one-unit houses, duplexes, triplexes, four-plexes, and mobile homes that are billed for collection service individually and located on a Public Street or Private Road. Source-separated: Certain reclaimable materials that are separated from Garbage by the generator for recycling or reuse, including but not limited to Recyclables, Compostables, and other materials. Strike Contingency Plan: The plan the Contractor will develop pursuant to Section 4.1.19 of this Contract. Transition and Implementation Plan: The plan that the Contractor will develop pursuant to Section 4.1.21 of this Contract. City of Federal Way 5 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Unacceptable Waste: Materials not allowed in the City's collection program, including but not limited to highly flammable substances, Hazardous Waste, liquid wastes, special wastes, certain pathological and biological wastes, explosives, toxic materials, radioactive materials, material that the disposal facility is not authorized to receive and/or dispose of, and other materials deemed by state, federal or local law, or in the reasonable discretion of the Contractor, to be dangerous or threatening to health or the environment, or which cannot be legally accepted at the applicable disposal facility. WUTC:The Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission. Yard Debris: Leaves, grass, prunings, branches and small trees. Materials larger than four (4) inches in diameter or four (4) feet in length are excluded. Bundles of Yard Debris up to two (2) feet in diameter by four (4) feet in length and no more than fifty (50) pounds, shall be allowed, and shall be secured by degradable string or twine, not nylon or other synthetic materials. Un-flocked, undecorated whole Christmas trees cut to less than six (6) feet in height are acceptable. Kraft paper bags or Cans labeled "Yard Debris" may also be used to contain extra Yard Debris. 2.TERM OF CONTRACT The Term of this Contract is ten (10) years and one month starting on the Date of Commencement of Service. The City and Contractor, may, at the sole option of the City, extend the Contract for one extension not to exceed two (2) years in duration. The extension shall be under the original terms and conditions of this Contract or as the Contract may have been amended at the time of the extension. To exercise the option to extend this Contract, written notice shall be given by the City to the Contractor not less than one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the expiration of the Contract Term or the expiration of a previous extension. With the Parties' written consent, the requirement of one hundred and eighty days prior notice may be waived. At the time the City provides the Contractor with written notice of extension the Contractor may provide the City with a written proposal detailing services, terms, and rates for a longer contract extension or renegotiation of this Contract. The City shall review the proposal and may, at its sole discretion, determine whether to enter into negotiations regarding the proposal. 3.CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES The Contractor represents and warrants to the City as follows: • Organization and Qualification. The Contractor is duly incorporated, validly existing, and in good standing under the laws of the state of Washington, and has all requisite corporate power and authority to enter into and to perform its obligations under this Contract. • Authority. The Contractor has the authority to execute this Contract, to make the representations and warranties set forth in it, and to perform the obligations of the Contractor under this Contract in accordance with its terms. This Contract has been validly executed by an authorized representative of the Contractor, with the authority to sign on behalf of and bind the Contractor, and this Contract constitutes a valid and legally binding and enforceable obligation of Contractor. City of Federal Way 6 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract • Government Authorizations and Consents. The Contractor has or will obtain at its sole cost prior to the Date of Commencement of Service any such licenses, permits, and other authorizations from federal, state, and other governmental authorities, as are necessary for the performance of its obligations under this Contract. • Compliance with Laws. The Contractor is not in violation of, and will not knowingly violate, any applicable laws, ordinances, or regulations, which may impact the Contractor's ability to perform its obligations under this Contract or which may have any impact on the City. The Contractor is not subject to any order or judgment of any court, tribunal, or governmental agency that impacts its operations or assets or its ability to perform its obligations under this Contract. • Accuracy of Information. None of the representations or warranties in this Contract, and none of the documents, statements, reports, certificates, or schedules furnished or to be furnished by the Contractor pursuant to this Contract or in connection with the performance of the obligations contemplated under this Contract, at any time contain or will contain untrue statements of a material fact or omissions of material facts. • Independent Examination. In accepting and fulfilling responsibilities established by this contract, the Contractor represents and affirms that it has made its own examination of all conditions affecting the performance of this Contract, currently and into the future, and of the quantity, quality, and expense of labor, equipment, vehicles, facilities, properties, materials needed, and of applicable taxes, permits, and applicable laws. The Contractor affirms that within the Service Area it is aware of the present placement and location of in-place Containers. The Contractor represents and warrants that it is capable of servicing Containers at their present locations, and that it is capable of providing service to Customers in any areas of the Service Area that may be built out or developed during the term of this Contract. 4. SCOPE OF WORK 4.1 General Collection System Requirements 4.1.1 Service Area The Contractor shall provide all Services pursuant to this Contract throughout the entire Service Area. Any areas annexed into the City during the term of this Contract shall be addressed outside of this Contract through separate franchise or other arrangement. Unless the Contractor is providing solid waste collection service within the annexed area under a WUTC certificate at the time of annexation, the City shall have no obligation to offer such annexed areas to be served by the Contractor nor shall the Contractor have an obligation to service such areas. If the Contractor is providing solid waste collection service within the annexed area under a WUTC certificate at the time of annexation, then RCW 35A.14.900 shall govern the respective rights and obligations of the parties with respect to solid waste collection service. City of Federal Way 7 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.1.2 Service to Residences on Private Roads and Driveways The Contractor shall provide Curbside service to all Residences located on Private Roads, except as noted in this Section. Drive-in charges are to be used only for requested service on Driveways and are prohibited on Private Roads. The Contractor shall use smaller limited-access service vehicles as necessary to provide service to those Customers. In the event that the Contractor believes that a Private Road cannot be safely negotiated or that providing walk-in service on Driveways for Single-Family Residence Customers is impractical due to distance or unsafe conditions, the Contractor may request that the City evaluate on-site conditions and make a determination of the best approach for providing safe and appropriate service to the Customer. The City's determination shall be final, provided that the Contractor shall not be required to endanger workers, equipment, or property. If the Contractor believes that there is a probability of Private Road or Driveway damage, the Contractor shall inform the respective Customer(s) and may require a road damage waiver agreement in a form previously approved by the City. In such event, if the Customer(s) refuse to sign such a road damage waiver, the Contractor may decline to provide service on those Private Roads or Driveways, and the Customer(s) will only be serviced from the closest Public Road access. Such determination that damage is probable must be approved in writing by the City prior to any action or refusal of service by the Contractor. 4.1.3 Hours/Days of Collection All collections from Single-family Residential Customers and Residential zones, including mixed-use areas shall be made between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on a consistent weekday, unless the City authorizes a temporary extension of hours or days. Saturday collection is allowed to the extent consistent with holiday and inclement weather schedules. All collections from Commercial Customers shall be made between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, provided that service to those Customers shall neither disturb Residential Customers in adjoining Residential zoned areas, nor violate the noise provisions of the Federal Way Revised Code, as it currently exists and as amended in the future. Collections from Commercial Customers within audible distance of Residential Customers shall be made only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., and no earlier than 9:00 a.m. on Saturday. In case of complaint, Contractor shall adjust routes to eliminate noise impacts. Exemptions to the hour requirements may be granted in writing in advance by the City to accommodate the special needs of Commercial Customers where allowed by the Federal Way Revised Code. The City's noise ordinance, as it currently exists and as amended in the future, may further restrict these terms and hours of collection. 4.1.4 Employee Conduct The Contractor's employees collecting Garbage, Recyclables, or Compostables shall at all times be courteous, refrain from loud, inappropriate or obscene language, exercise due care, perform their work without delay, minimize noise, and avoid damage to public and private property. If on private property, Contractor employees shall follow the regular pedestrian walkways and paths, returning to the street City of Federal Way 8 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract after replacing empty Containers. Contractor employees shall not trespass or loiter, cross flowerbeds, hedges, or property of adjoining premises, or meddle with property that does not concern them or their task at hand. While performing work under the Contract, Contractor employees shall wear a professional and presentable uniform with a company emblem visible to the average observer, and carry photo identification on their person. At the City's option and direction, Contractor employees shall work with groups or organizations, such as neighborhood community organizations, homeowner associations, or the City's Utilities, Police, or Fire Departments, for training to recognize and call the appropriate agency when suspicious activities are observed. If any person employed by the Contractor to perform collection services is, in the opinion of the City, incompetent, disorderly, or otherwise unsatisfactory, the City shall promptly document the incompetent, disorderly, or unsatisfactory conduct in writing and transmit the documentation to the Contractor with a demand that such conduct be corrected. The Contractor shall promptly investigate any written complaint from the City regarding any unsatisfactory performance by any of its employees and take immediate corrective action. The City reserves the right to request at any time that the employee be removed from all performance of additional work under this Contract. The Contractor shall remove the employee from Contract work within four hours of City notification. 4.1.5 Disabled Persons Service The Contractor shall provide Single-Family carryout service from an exterior location convenient for the Customer for Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables in cases where no household member has the ability to place Containers at the Curb, at no additional charge. The Contractor shall use criteria that are fair and meet the needs of the City's disabled residents. These criteria shall comply with all local, state, and federal regulations, and shall be subject to City review and approval prior to program implementation,which shall not be unreasonably withheld by the City. 4.1.6 Holiday Schedules The Contractor shall observe the same holiday schedule as the King County Transfer Stations. When observed holidays fall on a regular collection day, the Contractor shall reschedule the remainder of the week of regular collection to the next succeeding business day, which shall include Saturdays. The Contractor may not collect Single-Family Residence and Multifamily Complex Garbage, Recyclables, or Compostables earlier than the regular collection day due to a holiday. Commercial collections may be made one (1) day early only with the consent of the Commercial Customer. Holiday scheduling information shall be included in written program materials, on the Contractor's web site, and by press releases to general news media in the Federal Way area by the Contractor the week prior to the holiday affecting service. 4.1.7 Inclement Weather The Contractor shall provide all collection services unless weather conditions are such that the Contractor determines continued operation would result in danger to the Contractor's staff, area residents, or property. In that event, the Contractor shall collect only in areas that do not pose a danger. When inclement weather occurs, the Contractor shall notify the City by telephone or email of operation plans by collection sector by 6:00 a.m. for that business day. Once Contractor vehicles are on-route, all City of Federal Way 9 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract areas missed due to hazardous conditions shall be confirmed by a route supervisor, and an update of missed collections by Customer type and vicinity shall be reported to the City not later than 6:00 p.m. that business day. To the extent practical, the Contractor shall coordinate missed collections in Single- Family Residence areas so that either all or none of their materials are collected. The Contractor shall provide automated notification calls, texts, or e-mails (at Customers' preference) to all Customers missed that day by 6:00 p.m., with information about the planned make-up service schedule by material type. As conditions change, the Contractor will also promptly update its website with collection status and detailed Customer instructions specific for each impacted service day. On each inclement weather day, the Contractor shall release notices to local newspapers and radio stations notifying residents of the modification to the collection schedule. For all Customers, the Contractor shall collect reasonable accumulated volumes of materials equal to what would have been collected on the missed collection day(s) from Customers at no extra charge. Following notification to the City, the Contractor will be provided temporary authorization to perform collection services after regular collection hours and/or on Saturdays following disruptions due to weather in order to finish collection routes. The Contractor shall handle weather-related service interruptions as follows: 1. Single Family Customers: Make-up collection for Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables shall occur on that Customer's service day the following week. 2. The Contractor shall provide make-up collection service for Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables from Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers as soon as weather conditions allow safe operations. In the event inclement weather prevents service on the same scheduled Single-family Residence collection day(s) two or more weeks in a row (for example, no collection service for Tuesday Customers two weeks running), make-up collection will be made on the next possible day. In these cases, the Contractor shall not wait for the regularly scheduled collection day the following week to service that area. The Contractor and City will develop and implement a weather-related operations and communications protocol to more specifically address management of service disruptions. This protocol will detail pre- event and post-event inclement weather designation and recovery plans, as well as identifying potential temporary collection sites. The inclement weather/disruption in service requirements in the preceding paragraphs may be changed upon mutual written agreement of the Contractor and City at any time during the term of this Contract to better serve Customers. Weather policies shall be included in program information provided to Customers and on the Contractor's city-specific webpage. City of Federal Way 10 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.1.8 Suspending Collection from Problem Customers The City and Contractor acknowledge that, in rare cases, some Customers may cause disruptions or conflicts that make continued service to that Customer unreasonable. Those disruptions or conflicts may include, but not be limited to, repeated damage to Contractor-provided containers, repeated suspect claims of timely set-out followed by demands for return collection at no charge, repeated unsubstantiated claims of Contractor damage to a Customer's property, repeated contamination of Recyclables or Compostables, repeated instances of Unacceptable Waste included in Garbage, or other such problems. The Contractor shall make every reasonable effort to provide service to those problem Customers; however, the Contractor may deny or discontinue service to a problem Customer after prior written notice is given to the City of the intent to deny or discontinue service, including the name, service address, reason for such action, and whether reasonable efforts to accommodate the Customer and provide services have occurred and failed. If the Customer submits a written appeal to the City objecting to the Contractor decision, the City may, at its discretion, intervene in the dispute. In this event, the decision of the City shall be final. The City may also require the denial or discontinuance of service to any Customer who is abusing the service or is determined to be ineligible. 4.1.9 Missed Collections If Garbage, Recyclables, or Compostables are set out inappropriately, improperly prepared, or contaminated with unacceptable materials, the Contractor shall place in a prominent location a written notification tag in accordance with the Contractor's Contamination Reduction Plan that identifies the specific problem(s) and reason(s) for rejecting the materials for collection. Failure to provide proper written notification to Customers, per the Contamination Reduction Plan referenced in Section 4.1.11, of the reason for rejecting materials for collection shall be considered a missed collection and subject to performance fees due to lack of proper Customer notification. The failure of the Contractor to collect Garbage, Recyclables, or Compostables that have been set out by a Customer in the proper manner on the appropriate day shall be considered a missed collection, and the Contractor shall collect the materials from the Customer within one business day of the Contractor's receipt of notification of the missed pick-up. The Contractor shall maintain an electronic record of all calls related to missed collections and the response provided by the Contractor. Such records shall be made available for inspection upon request by the City, and the information shall be included in monthly reports. (See Reporting requirements set forth in Section 4.3.4). If the Contractor is requested by the Customer to make a return trip due to no fault of the Contractor, which the Contractor can prove through documentation (e.g., the Containers were not placed at the curb on time and the driver documented that fact in a log, with a photograph, etc.), the Contractor may charge the Customer an additional return trip fee for this service, provided the Contractor notifies the Customer of this charge in advance and the Customer agrees to payment of the return trip fee. The Contractor will not be liable for a missed collection in such case. City of Federal Way 11 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.1.10 Same Day Collection Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables collection shall occur on the same regularly scheduled day of the week for Single-Family Residence Customers. The collection of Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables from Multifamily Complexes and Commercial Customers need not be scheduled on the same day. 4.1.11 Requirement to Recycle and Compost and Quality Assurance The Contractor shall recycle or compost all Source-separated Recyclables and Compostables collected, unless express prior written permission is provided by the City. The Contractor shall use facilities that: • Process materials to a high standard to maximize the recovery and recycling of all incoming recyclable and compostable materials; • Are operated to minimize cross-contamination of materials that would result in otherwise Recyclable materials being misdirected to a market or disposal where they would not be recovered; • Are designed and operated to minimize the residual stream of otherwise recoverable materials destined for disposal. • Have sufficient preprocess and screening staff and equipment to ensure that otherwise recoverable materials are not cross-contaminated and rendered non-recyclable due to the nature of the processing facility. The City and Contractor agree that the Contractor is being fully compensated to recycle or compost these collected materials, and that maximum cost-effective diversion of Recyclables and Compostables from disposal is a primary objective of the services provided under this Contract. Concurrently with the start of this Contract, the Contractor shall implement a Contamination Reduction Plan for Recyclables and Compostables for tagging, probationary periods, material rejection, and suspension of service. Contamination Reduction Plan elements will be highlighted that differ between collection sectors (Single-Family, Multifamily, Commercial, and Drop-box). The Contamination Reduction Plan will address thresholds for when contamination levels trigger Customer contact, when to place a Customer on service probation for possible discontinued collection, when to suspend collection service and remove the subject Carts or Containers, and finally but not limited to, procedures to allow a Customer to reinstate and resume service after it has been suspended after following established contamination reduction protocols. The Contractor shall implement the Contamination Reduction Plan for all Customers and shall notify the City via email of any Customer being charged contamination fees or facing service suspension. Specific actions are listed in Section 4.3.5 for the Contractor to address contamination issues at Multifamily Complexes. The Contractor and City shall annually update these procedures to ensure that contamination problems are addressed promptly and fairly for all sectors. No later than November 1 of each year of the Contract, the Contractor and/or City shall propose any desired changes to the Contamination Reduction Plan for the following calendar year. The Contractor and City shall mutually agree upon changes to the plan by December 31 of each year to continuously improve Recyclables and Compostables material quality. City of Federal Way 12 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract The City reserves the right to engage in product stewardship and/or waste prevention activities, and Contractor acknowledges that product stewardship systems may alter the composition or quantity of Recyclables set out for collection. Based on waste prevention, product stewardship efforts, or changed market conditions, the City may elect to remove one or more materials from the Exhibit C list. The Parties agree to determine if such removal from the Exhibit C list creates significant costs or savings, and to explore changes in compensation per Section 5.3. 4.1.12 Routing, Notification, and Approval The Contractor shall indicate, on a map acceptable to the City, the day of the week Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables shall be collected from each Single-family Residence. The Contractor may change the day of collection by giving notice at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of the proposed change and obtaining written approval from the City. On the City's approval, the Contractor shall provide affected Customers with at least fourteen (14) days written, telephone, and/or e-mail notice of pending changes of collection day. The Contractor shall obtain the prior written approval from the City of the notice to be given to the Customer; such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. 4.1.13 Vehicle and Equipment Type/Age/Condition/Use The Contractor shall use new 2020 or later model year collection vehicles for Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables collection services performed under this Contract. Back-up vehicles used fewer than thirty (30) operating days a calendar year shall not be subject to the age that apply to regularly-used vehicles, but shall be presentable, shall be in safe working order, and shall be subject to all other conditions of this section. The accumulated annual use of individual back-up vehicles shall be reported in the Contractor's monthly report. Vehicles used in the performance of this Contract shall be of sufficient size and dimension to provide service to all Customers, regardless of location. In some cases, this may mean that a small collection vehicle, capable of servicing narrow and/or tight locations must be used, and the Contractor shall procure, maintain, and operate those vehicles to ensure collection services are provided throughout the Service Area. Vehicles shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary manner, and shall be thoroughly washed at least once each week. All collection equipment shall have appropriate safety markings, including all highway lighting, flashing and warning lights, clearance lights, and warning flags, all in accordance with current statutes, rules, and regulations. Equipment shall be maintained in good condition at all times. Vehicles shall be repaired and/or have damaged areas repainted upon showing rust on the body or chassis or at the request of the City. All parts and systems of the collection vehicles shall operate properly and be maintained in a condition compliant with all federal, state, and local safety requirements and be in a condition satisfactory to the City. All vehicles shall be equipped with variable tone or proximity activated reverse movement back-up alarms. City of Federal Way 13 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract The Contractor shall maintain collection vehicles and Containers to ensure that no liquid wastes (e.g., Garbage or Compostables leachate) or oils (e.g., lubricating, hydraulic, or fuel) are discharged to Customer premises or streets. Any equipment not meeting these standards shall not be used within the Service Area until repairs are made. All collection and route supervisor vehicles used by the Contractor shall be equipped with a minimum 10-gallon capacity spill kit. Clean-up of any discharge of liquid wastes or oils that may occur from Contractor's vehicles or Containers shall be initiated within three (3) hours of being noticed/notified by route staff, customers, or the City, and shall be performed by the Contractor at its sole expense. Such clean-up or removal shall be documented with pictures, and notice of such clean-up shall be provided to the City in writing. The Contractor shall notify the City-designated spill reporting telephone number of any spills that enter drainages within four (4) hours. Failure by the Contractor to clean-up the discharge in a timely fashion to the satisfaction of the City shall be cause for performance fees, as described in Section 6.1. The Contractor shall notify the City and the Customer of any leakage from non-Contractor-owned Containers within four (4) hours of observation so that repairs may be made in a timely manner. No advertising shall be allowed on Contractor vehicles other than the Contractor's name, logo, customer service telephone number, and website address, unless otherwise previously approved in writing by the City. Special promotional messages may be permitted by the City; provided they are either painted directly on vehicles or on placards attached to vehicles. The City's approval must be granted in writing. Vehicle inventory numbers shall be displayed on the passenger (right) door and rear panel of the vehicle body and shall show, in lettering at least 12" high, an abbreviated truck designation number specific to the City. For example, FW-1, FW-2, etc., limited to a two digit letter and numeral to aid in rapid identification of vehicles to allow more precise reporting and correction of any unsatisfactory condition related to specific vehicles. The City may approve a different numbering system proposed by the Contractor provided that it meets the objective of rapid and memorable truck identification All Contractor route, service, and supervisory vehicles shall be equipped with properly licensed two-way communication equipment, capable of communicating within the entire Service Area. Collection vehicles shall also be equipped with back-up cameras, as well as route-recording cameras integrated with their on-board route management system. All collection vehicles shall be equipped with global positioning systems ("GPS"), as well as an on-board computer and data tracking system to track route progress and log non-set-outs, extras, and other service issues. The system shall incorporate photo documentation of all persistent on-route service issues for a particular Customer with repeated complaints. The Contractor's drivers shall be fully trained and required to use these systems. The resulting data shall be uploaded to the Contractor's Customer service database no less than hourly to allow Customer service and route management personnel to be fully apprised of route progress, and be able to address misses and other Customer inquiries in near real-time. City of Federal Way 14 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.1.14 Container Requirements and Ownership Contractor Garbage fees in Exhibit B include all costs of the associated Containers unless Container rental for a particular service is specifically listed in Exhibit B, such as rent for Drop-box Containers. Single-Family Residence, Multifamily Complex, and Commercial Customers must use Contractor- provided Containers for their initial Container of Garbage collection service, with the exception of compacting Drop-box Containers, which may be Customer-owned or leased from other parties. Plastic bags or Cans may be used for excess volumes of Garbage, but not as a Customer's primary container. All micro-cans, Cans, and Carts made obsolete at the start of this Contract that are unwanted by the Customer shall be collected by Contractor and reused or recycled at no additional charge during the first thirty (30) days following the Date of Commencement of Service. In the event the Customer retains and uses a Can for Extra Units, the Contractor shall handle the Customer-owned Garbage Container in such a way as to prevent undue damage. The Contractor shall be responsible for rectifying all Contractor- caused unnecessary or unreasonable damage to Customer-owned Containers. All Contractor-provided Containers shall be permanently, clearly, and prominently molded-in, molded- on, imprinted, or otherwise labeled in a fashion that any reasonable person can readily determine the size capacity and material preparation requirements of the Container. Contractor-provided Containers shall not be screened, molded-in, molded-on, imprinted, or otherwise permanently labeled with the Contractor's logo or company name. All Contractor-provided Containers shall be delivered in fully working condition without needed maintenance, repairs, and/or painting, and free of residue and odors from prior use. In the event that a particular Customer repeatedly damages a Container or requests more than one replacement Container during the term of the Contract or due to negligence or misuse, the Contractor may charge the Customer for the depreciated value of the Container and shall forward in writing the Customer's name and address to the City with a full explanation of incident(s). In the event that the problem continues, the Contractor may discontinue service to that Customer, provided the City provides prior written approval. 4.1.14.1 Garbage, Recyclables,and Compostables Carts The Contractor shall provide a 20-, 35-, 64-, and 96-gallon Garbage Carts for the respective level of Garbage collection, 35-, 64-, and 96-gallon Carts for Recyclables collection, and 35-, 64-, and 96-gallon Compostables Carts for Compostables collection. All Carts shall be manufactured from a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) post-consumer recycled plastic, with a lid that will accommodate a label. Carts shall be provided to requesting Customers within seven (7) days of the Customer's initial request. All Contractor-provided Carts shall be maintained by the Contractor in good condition for material storage and handling; contain no jagged edges or holes; contain wheels or rollers for movement and be equipped with an anti-skid device or sufficient surface area on the bottom of the container to prevent unwanted movement. Carts shall contain instructions for proper use, including any Customer actions City of Federal Way 15 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract that would void manufacture warranties (such as placement of hot ashes in the container causing the container to melt), and procedures to follow to minimize potential fire problems. Collection personnel shall proactively note damaged hinges, holes, poorly functioning wheels, and other similar repair needs for Contractor-provided Carts (including those for Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables), and forward written or electronic repair notices that business day to the Contractor's service personnel. Repaired or replacement carts shall be provided within seven (7) days at the Contractor's expense. Any Cart that is damaged or missing due to an accident, collection truck mechanical error, act of nature or the elements, fire, or theft or vandalism by a third party shall be replaced no later than three (3) business days after notice from the Customer or the City at the Contractor's expense. In the event that a Cart is inadvertently lost into a collection vehicle during collection due to mechanical or operator error, the Contractor shall inform the Customer that business day. All Cart repairs and replacements shall be at no charge to the Customer unless the Customer's negligence has caused the damage. 4.1.14.2 Detachable Containers and Drop-box Containers The Contractor shall furnish and install 1-, 1.5-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 6-, and 8-cubic yard Detachable Containers, and 10-, 20-, 25-, 30-, and 40-cubic yard un-compacted Drop-box Containers to any Customer who requires their use for storage and collection of Garbage or Recyclables within three (3) days of the Customer's request. Containers shall be located on the premises in compliance with any related ordinance, and a manner satisfactory to the Customer and for collection by the Contractor. The Contractor shall charge rent for temporary and permanent Drop-box Container service in accordance with Exhibit B. The Contractor may not charge Customers any additional fees, charges, rates, or any expenses in connection with Drop-box Container service other than the applicable fees listed in Exhibit B. Detachable Containers shall be watertight and equipped with tight-fitting metal or plastic covers; have four (4) wheels for Containers 4-cubic yards and under unless site-specific conditions (slope or service access) dictate the use of a non-wheeled Container; be in good condition for Garbage, Compostables, or Recyclables storage and handling; be safe for the intended use; and, have no leaks, jagged edges, or holes. Drop-box Containers shall be all-metal, and if requested by a Customer, equipped with a tight- fitting screened or solid cover operated by a winch in good repair. The Contractor shall contact the City's Fire Marshal and obtain a determination concerning the conditions under which plastic Detachable Containers may be used. The Contractor may use plastic Detachable Containers at all locations where allowed by the City's Fire Marshal. Each plastic Detachable Container shall be marked with an additional sticker warning Customers and the Contractor's staff where the Container may be placed as determined by the City's Fire Marshal. Detachable Containers shall be cleaned, reconditioned, and repainted (if necessary), at the Contractor's expense before being delivered to a Customer. Steel Containers shall be repainted as needed, or upon notification from the City. The Contractor shall provide a fee-based On-call Container cleaning service to Customers. City of Federal Way 16 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract All Containers on Customers' premises are at the Contractor's risk and not the City's. The Contractor shall repair or replace within one (1) business day any Container that was supplied by or taken over by the Contractor and was in use if the City personnel, King County Health Department inspector, or other agent having safety or health jurisdiction determines that the Container fails to comply with reasonable standards or constitutes a surface water contamination, health, or safety hazard. The Contractor shall place Detachable Containers in areas mutually agreed upon by the Contractor and Customer with the least slope and best vehicle access possible. For Customers that must stage their Detachable Containers on Public Streets or on significantly sloped hills, the Contractor shall make a good faith effort to work with the Customer to ensure that Detachable Containers are not left unattended in potentially problematic staging areas and are sufficiently restrained such that the Container may not roll and cause harm to persons or property. The Contractor may require a Customer to attend to the Containers immediately prior to and after collection. Any disputes arising between the Contractor and a Customer as to what constitutes a "significantly sloped hill" or a "safety hazard" shall be submitted in writing to the City, and the City's decision shall be final. Containers shall be replaced after emptying in the same location as found, with all lids closed. Customers may elect to use Containers from other sources, and shall not be subject to discrimination by the Contractor regarding collection services, provided that such Containers are compatible with the Contractor's collection equipment; however, Containers owned or secured by Customers must be properly labeled with Contractor-provided stickers to be eligible for collection (except in the case of compactor Containers). The Contractor is not required to service Customer Containers that are not compatible with the Contractor's equipment. 4.1.14.3 Ownership At the end of the Contract Term or in the event the Contract is terminated for any reason, any or all Containers used by Contractor to provide Contract Services (including any Big Belly litter receptacles), shall, at the option of the City, revert to City ownership without further compensation to the Contractor. Containers that do not revert to City ownership shall by removed from Customer locations by the Contractor within thirty (30) days of the expiration of this Contract. Temporary Containers, Compactor Drop-boxes leased to Customers outside of this Contract, and all Containers held in reserve at the Contractor's yard and not actively in service at a Customer location are excluded from this provision. The City may elect to assign this potential ownership of said Containers to a third-party, and shall provide written notice to the Contractor. Any remaining warranties associated with the Containers described herein shall be transferred to the City or the City's assignee. The City in advance accepts all such Containers in their "as-is, where-is" condition and without any express or implied warranty by the Contractor of any kind, including but not limited to any warranty of fitness for any particular purpose or any warranty of merchantability. As between the City and the Contractor, the City assumes all risks of loss or liability on account of the City's exercising of its rights under this Section 4.1.14.3 or any use made of any such Containers after they become the property of the City or assignee of the City. City of Federal Way 17 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.1.14.4 Container Colors and Labeling Contractor-provided Carts and Detachable Containers for Recyclables shall be blue, Compostables Carts shall be green, and Carts and Detachable Containers for Garbage shall be grey. Specific Container colors shall be approved in writing by the City prior to the Contractor's initial order of new Containers. All Carts, including new and those in place at the beginning of this Contract, shall be labeled with material preparation, and contact information that includes both the (253) 833-3333 customer service phone number and the City's website address. All Carts shall be embossed or labeled with the type of material to be placed in the cart with lettering no less than two inches high on both sides of the Cart. All label messaging and embossed lettering shall be approved by the City prior to ordering by the Contractor. Label location and label placement guidelines on Carts shall be subject to the City's prior approval. Labels shall be reapplied when faded, damaged, or upon the City or customer request. If the Garbage, Recycling, or Compostables collection program instructions on affixed labels becoming obsolete, the Contractor at their sole expense shall produce and affix labels featuring current information on all Carts. All Detachable Containers and Drop-box Containers to be used for Garbage or Recyclables collection shall have materials preparation instructions and telephone/contact information, including both a customer service phone number and a website address, printed on a sticker, and subject to the prior written approval of the City. All Detachable Containers and Drop-box Containers to be used for Garbage or Recyclables shall have a sticker affixed that states: "Leaky dumpster? Damaged Lid?" and provides the Contractor's applicable phone number to call for repair or replacement. Information shall be printed in a size that is easily read by the users, on durable UV-resistant label stock squarely affixed to each Container. All labels shall be approved in writing by the City prior to ordering by the Contractor. Label location and label placement guidelines on Containers shall be subject to the City's prior written approval. All Contractor-provided Containers shall be relabeled by the Contractor if labels fade or are unreadable, or upon City's request for any individual Container. 4.1.14.5 Container Weights The Contractor shall not be required to lift or remove materials from any Container exceeding the safe working capacity of the Container, lifting mechanism or collection vehicle. For Drop-box Containers, the combined weight of the Drop-Box and contents must not cause the collection vehicle to exceed legal road weight limits. Any loose Extra Units that are not placed in a Container and must be manually loaded shall be limited to fifty (50) pounds per bag or bundle unless otherwise authorized by the Contractor. 4.1.14.6 Container Removal Upon City or Customer Request The Contractor shall remove all Containers upon service cancellation within seven (7) days after the final service date for which Customer payment is anticipated, or upon three (3) days of specific Customer, property manager, property owner, or the City's request. Failure to remove Containers within the City of Federal Way 18 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract specified timeline shall be subject to the same performance fees as delayed Container delivery for that Customer sector. The contents of removed Containers shall be managed as if they were collected on a regular route (e.g., Recyclables shall be recycled, Compostables shall be delivered for composting). The disposal or recycling of materials accumulating in the Contractor's Container at the former Customer's location after the final Customer-paid collection shall be at the Contractor's cost, not the former Customer's cost. 4.1.15 Inventory of Vehicles and Facilities The Contractor shall provide to the City, on the Date of Commencement of Service of this Contract, a complete initial inventory of the vehicles and facilities to be used in the performance of this Contract. The inventory shall include each vehicle (including chassis model year, type of body, material collected, capacity, model, and vehicle identification number) and each facility to be used in performance of this Contract (including address and purpose of the facility). The Contractor may change vehicles and facilities from time to time, and shall include the revised inventory in the monthly report provided for in Section 4.3.4.1.The Contractor shall maintain vehicles and facilities levels during the performance of this Contract at least equal to those levels described in the initial inventory. The City reserves the right to request maintenance history logs for vehicles or equipment during the performance of this Contract. 4.1.16 Spillage and Leakage of Vehicle Contents All materials collected by the Contractor shall be completely contained in collection vehicles at all times. Hoppers on all collection vehicles shall be cleared or emptied frequently to prevent blowing or spillage of debris. All Drop-Box loads (both open and compactor) shall be properly and thoroughly covered or tarped to prevent any spillage of material prior to Contractor vehicle entering any Private Road or Public Street. Any Contractor-caused spillage or leakage of materials, whether reported by Customers, Contractor employees, or the City, shall be cleaned up or removed by the Contractor within four (4) hours of occurrence at Contractor's sole expense. Such spillage or leakage shall be contained immediately by Contractor employees, including immediate deployment of on-board "spill kits" to prevent or limit any materials from entering the City's municipal stormwater system. The Contractor shall develop spill response procedures for review and approval by the City before initiating any work under this Contract. Prior to operating any vehicle in the City, all Contractor vehicle drivers shall be provided with hands-on training on the location, maintenance, and use of"spill kits" and associated containment and notification procedures. Such training shall be provided to all vehicle drivers at least annually. The Contractor shall be responsible for reimbursement of all City-incurred costs in the event that City staff or agents subsequently provide spill containment or clean-up of spillage or leakage caused by the Contractor. In the event of leakage from Contractor vehicles or any Containers, the Contractor shall notify the designated City contact and provide documentation including pictures taken before and after clean-up or removal, along with incident description and location, how and when Contractor learned of the City of Federal Way 19 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract incident, and a summary of measures used to correct the incident. This information will be reported via e-mail to the Contract administrator within one (1) business day of the incident. If the leakage is due to faulty door or gate seals on Contractor's equipment, repairs shall be completed before the equipment returns to operation in the City. Any Contractor-supplied Container reported to be leaking by the City, Contractor employees, or Customers shall be replaced by the Contractor within one (1) business day of notification. Leakage or spillage not cleaned up or removed by the Contractor within the required time frame shall be cause for performance fees as described in Section 6.1, and may also be subject to fines and penalties pursuant to City municipal code. Contractor expressly acknowledges it is solely responsible for any local, state, or federal violations which may result from leakage or spillage resulting from Contractor's operations. Failure of the Contractor to comply with all clauses in this Section shall be cause for performance fees, as described in Section 6.1. 4.1.17 Disruption Due to Construction The City reserves the right to construct any improvement or to permit any such construction in any Public Street in such manner as the City may direct, which may have the effect for a time of preventing the Contractor from traveling the accustomed route or routes for collection; However, the Contractor and the City shall develop a reasonable workaround to enable the Contractor to continue to collect Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables to the nearest extent possible as though no interference existed upon the streets or alleys normally traversed. These services shall be performed at no extra fee or cost to the City or the Contractor's Customers. 4.1.18 Contractor Labor Negotiations, Strike Contingency Planning,and Performance During Labor Disruption No later than ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of any labor agreement associated with services performed under this Contract, the Contractor shall provide the City in writing with its planned response to labor actions that could compromise the Contractor's performance under this Contract. The Contractor-prepared Strike Contingency Plan shall address in detail: 1. The Contractor's specific staffing plan to cover Contract services, including identification of staff resources moved from out-of-area operations and the use of local management staff to provide basic services. The staffing plan shall be sufficient to provide recovery of full operations within one (1)week following the initiation of the disruption. 2. Contingency training plans to ensure that replacement and management staff operating routes are able to continue to collect route data and follow collection and material delivery procedures for all material streams collected from Customers. 3. Identification of staffed temporary Drop-box Containers or staffed packer truck locations for all material streams. For all sites identified in the Contractor-prepared Strike Contingency Plan, the City of Federal Way 20 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Contractor shall list the property owner/lessee's contact information and the date on which permission for temporary use was received. The City shall review these locations, after which the City shall approve or deny in writing use of specific locations. 4. A recovery plan to address how materials will be collected in the event of a short-notice disruption (e.g., a wildcat strike) that does not allow the Contractor to collect all materials on their regular schedule within one (1)week following the initiation of the disruption. The Contractor shall keep the City informed of the status of active labor negotiations on a timely basis. During the period active negotiation phase near the end of labor contracts with Contractor employees or at any time when strike authorization is under active consideration by Contractor's employees, the Contractor shall keep the City informed on a daily basis. In the event that labor disruptions of any kind result in reductions in service delivery, the Contractor shall inform the City within three (3) hours by phone and e-mail of the nature and scope of the disruption, as well as the Contractor's plans for activating Strike Contingency Plan elements. The Contractor shall report to the City via e-mail the areas (per a detailed map) and customer counts of served and un-served customers by material stream and service sector at the close of each service day on which collection operations have been impacted. During recovery from the impacts of an active Labor Disruption, the Contractor shall provide make-up collection on Saturday for all Single-family Garbage, Compostables, and Recyclables collection Customers missed as a result of the Labor Disruption. In the event that a disruption lasts more than one (1) week for Garbage and Compostables or two (2) weeks for Recyclables for Single-family Residential Customers, the Contractor with approval of the City shall provide staffed Drop-box Containers and/or staffed packer trucks for Customer use for each affected material stream in approved locations throughout the affected service areas. The Contractor will also provide the collection of the equivalent volume of each material that would normally have been collected if no Labor Disruption had occurred, at no additional charge on the next regular collection day for each material. The City and Contractor agree that the following special compensation and performance fees reflect the best estimate of the impacts of the Labor Disruption to Customers and the City. (In addition to any regularly due Administrative fee) The Contractor shall pay the City monthly by the tenth day of the following month: 1. A performance fee of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) a day for each day of Labor Disruption from the 1"day to the 7th day of the Labor Disruption; 2. A performance fee of five thousand dollars ($5,000) a day for each day of Labor Disruption from the 8th day to 14th day of the Labor Disruption; and 3. A performance fee of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) a day for each day of Labor Disruption for every day beyond the 14th day of Labor Disruption. The performance fees listed as 1 through 3, above, are intended to apply to any complete work stoppage where alternative but substantially equivalent service by non-striking employees is not provided by the Contractor or otherwise. In the event substantially equivalent service is provided by the Contractor through the employment of non-striking employees at any point during the course of the City of Federal Way 21 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract labor disruption, the Contractor is entitled to reduce the amount of the performance fees that otherwise would be due on a pro-rata basis, based on the percentage of Contract service provided to Customer provided on that day. Given the nature of the array of pervasive service interruptions arising from labor disruptions, the Contractor shall not be allowed any cure period opportunity; provided, however, that the City may elect to receive the equivalent value of additional services, as negotiated, in lieu of some or all of these labor disruption-specific performance fees. The Contractor's failure to comply with the Contractor-prepared Strike Contingency Plan of this section shall be subject to a special fee of five hundred dollars ($500) per day for its non-compliance during the Labor Disruption event as determined solely by the City. This special fee is separate compensation to the City for the Contractor's failure to plan and execute the provisions of this section. The special fee shall be paid to the City within thirty(30) days of the Contractor's receipt of the City's invoice. Fees paid by the Contractor under the terms of this Section 4.1.19 are not regular performance fees for the purposes of Section 6 and shall not be counted in the cumulative performance fee default threshold referenced in Section 6.2 (6). 4.1.19 Site Planning and Building Design Review The Contractor shall, upon request and without additional cost, make available site planning assistance to either the City and/or property owners or their representatives. The site planning assistance shall be available for all new construction or remodeling of buildings and structures within the Service Area, and shall address the design and planning of Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables container storage and Contractor service access areas and their location upon the site of the proposed construction or remodeling project. Contractor planning assistance for optimizing loading docks and other areas shall also be available for existing building managers when realigning Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables services. Contractor planning assistance shall be provided within five (5) working days of request. Assistance shall include, but not be limited to, reviewing and providing comments on building designs and site plans to ensure that those designs and plans incorporate: • Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables removal areas and their location upon the site of the proposed construction or remodeling project; • Adequate floor and vertical space for the storage and collection of Containers for all materials; • adequate access for vehicles to collect and empty Containers, including overhead clearance, turning radius, and access that does not require backing across sidewalks or violating any City code; • Avoidance of surface water drains and ditches when considering Container locations and developing strategies for containment of any potential leaks; and, • Strategies to reduce interior and exterior noise and emissions. All communications regarding this process shall be conducted electronically via email. City of Federal Way 22 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.1.20 Safeguarding Public and Private Facilities Contractor shall protect all public and private improvements, facilities, and utilities whether located on public or private property, including, but not limited to, streets, curbs, signs/posts, light poles, and planting strips. If such improvements, facilities, utilities, or streets are damaged as a result of Contractor's operations, Contractor shall notify the City in writing of all damage within four (4) hours, and Contractor shall repair or replace the same or pay the City for the costs of repairs, including overhead and administrative costs. If the damage creates a public safety issue that requires an immediate response, Contractor shall, along with notifying the City in writing, call the City to inform them of such matter. If Contractor fails to do so within seven (7) days unless mutually agreed, the City shall cause repairs or replacement to be made, and the cost, including overhead and administrative costs, of doing so shall be paid by the Contractor. 4.1.21 Transition and Implementation of Contract The Contractor shall develop, with the City's input and prior written approval, and submit to the City no later than one hundred and twenty days (120) days after the Date of Execution of this Contract, a Transition and Implementation Plan for introducing the new and revised services to the different Customer sectors (i.e., Single-family, Multifamily Complex, and Commercial Customers), and detailing a specific timeline as to when different activities and events will occur, including details of Container delivery, how different events impact other events in the timeline and the process to be used to ensure that implementation occurs with no disruption. The Transition and Implementation Plan shall cover the entire period following the Date of Execution of this Contract, up through and including the six (6) month period following the Date of Commencement of Service. The Contractor shall separately describe in detail what is involved with each of the activities and events listed in the timeline. The Transition and Implementation Plan shall specifically address how the Contractor intends to proceed in the event of inclement weather and what contingency plans will be in place to accelerate implementation if Container delivery or other planned activities are impacted by inclement weather. The Contractor shall be responsible for funding all the design, development, printing, sorting, mail prep, delivery, and mailing costs, including the cost of the postage-prepaid mail-back cards and any costs associated with the website ordering services, and of all new and continuing service and educational materials described above and needed to comply with the Transition and Implementation Plan outreach described in this section of the Contract. Unless otherwise directed by the City, any additional promotional, educational, informational, and outreach materials provided by the Contractor to Customers in connection with the initial transition and implementation of the Contract shall be designed, developed, printed, and delivered by the Contractor, at the Contractor's cost, and subject to the City's prior review and written approval and the City's final approval as to method of delivery. The City will be provided a minimum of two (2) weeks to review the outreach materials included in the Contractor's Transition and Implementation Plan schedule to allow sufficient time for the City's prior review and written approval. City of Federal Way 23 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.1.22 Performance Review The City may, at its option, and upon reasonable notice to the Contractor, conduct a review of the Contractor's performance under this Contract. If conducted, the performance review shall include, but is not limited to, a review of the Contractor's performance relative to requirements and standards established in this Contract, including Customer service standards. The Contractor agrees to fully cooperate with the performance review and work with City staff and consultants to ensure a timely and complete review process. The results of the performance review shall be presented to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of completion. Should the City determine that the Contractor fails to meet the Contract performance requirements and standards, the City shall give the Contractor written notice of all deficiencies. The Contractor shall have sixty (60) days from its receipt of notice to correct deficiencies to the City's satisfaction. If the Contractor fails to correct deficiencies within sixty (60) days, the City may allow the Contractor additional time to comply, accept other remedies for the service failure, or proceed with the contract default process pursuant to Section 6.2 of this Contract, at the City's sole option. The costs of the development and implementation of any action plan required under this Section 4.1.22 or Section 6.1 for the purpose of addressing failures on the part of the Contractor to perform in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Contract shall be paid for solely by the Contractor, and the costs of developing or implementing such action plan shall not be passed on to Customers or the City, or included in rates or fees charged to Customers. The City may, at its option, and upon reasonable notice to the Contractor, design and implement an alternative annual Contract compliance monitoring program with or without Contractor performance incentives. If such a program is desired by the City, the City and Contractor agree to negotiate in good faith the monitoring methodologies used to ensure accurate and unbiased sampling of performance data. The City shall bear the costs of City staff, City-retained consultants and performance incentives (if used) and the Contractor shall bear the costs of Contractor staff and route costs to perform the monitoring. 4.1.23 Continual Monitoring and Evaluation of Operations The Contractor's supervisory and management staff shall be available to meet with the City at either the Contractor's office or City's offices, at the City's option, on a weekly basis during the period three (3) months before and two (2) months after the Date of Commencement of Service and monthly throughout the term of the Contract to discuss operational and Contract issues. The Contractor shall continually monitor and evaluate all operations to ensure that compliance with the provisions of this Contract is maintained. The City may periodically monitor collection system parameters such as participation, Container condition, contents weights, and waste composition. The Contractor shall assist and fully cooperate with the City by coordinating the Contractor's operations with the City's periodic monitoring to minimize inconvenience to Customers, the City, and the Contractor. The Contractor also shall provide full access to equipment, processing facilities, route and Customer service data, safety records, and other City of Federal Way 24 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract applicable information. The City's review of Contractor activities and records shall occur during normal Office Hours and shall be supervised by the Contractor's staff. 4.1.24 Collection/Disposal Restrictions Unless otherwise directed by the City, all Garbage collected under this Contract, as well as residues from processing Recyclables and Compostables (to the extent required for the City to comply with its Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County), shall be delivered to the King County Disposal System in compliance with all King County rules regarding such disposal. On any particular route, the Contractor shall collect Garbage and deliver it directly to the King County Disposal System, without adding material from routes or customers in other jurisdictions, unless prior written authorization is provided by the City for that particular route. Garbage containing obvious amounts of yard debris shall not knowingly be collected from Customers and instead prominently tagged with a written notice informing the Customer that King County does not accept yard debris mixed with Garbage for collection. The Contractor shall not knowingly collect or dispose of Unacceptable Waste or other materials that are either restricted from disposal or would pose a danger to collection employees. Whenever Contractor rejects or does not collect materials for this reason, the Contractor shall leave a written notice in a prominent location with the rejected materials to describe why rejected materials were not collected and providing the Customer with a contact for further information about proper disposal options for such materials. Title to and liability for any Unacceptable Wastes that are included with any materials collected under this Contract by Contractor despite the City's and Contractor's attempts to prevent the inclusion of such materials shall not pass to Contractor, but shall remain with the party from whom such Unacceptable Waste or any such other materials or substances is received. Garbage collected by the Contractor may be processed by the Contractor to recover recyclable material; provided, however, that the residual is appropriately disposed of within the King County Disposal System. The processing of such recyclable material shall only be undertaken with the prior written approval of King County and the City and in accordance with the Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between King County and the City. Contractor in all such instances shall charge Customers no more than the equivalent Garbage disposal fee within the King County Disposal System or such other disposal fee as the City reasonably directs the Contractor to charge. In addition, hauling fees charged by the Contractor in such instances shall be no higher than those provided for in Exhibit B. In the event that the City wishes to conduct a waste composition analysis, the Contractor, upon reasonable notice from the City, shall deliver collected Garbage from one or more routes to the designated sorting site and shall coordinate with the City to ensure successful sampling. In the event that the sorted Garbage requires delivery to a County authorized disposal site, the City shall pay the Contractor for that delivery based on the Contractor's standard Container rental and hauling rates. City of Federal Way 25 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.1.25 Emergency Response The Contractor shall assist the City in the event of a disaster or emergency declaration. Contractor services shall be provided as soon as practical upon City direction and paid at the Contract rates in Exhibit B. The Contractor shall keep full and complete records and documentation of all costs incurred in connection with disaster or emergency response, and include such information in the monthly and annual reports required under Section 4.3.4. Contractor shall maintain such records and documentation in accordance with the City's prior written approval and any standards established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and at the City's request, shall assist the City in developing any reports or applications necessary to seek federal assistance during or after a federally-declared disaster. 4.1.26 Early Implementation The Contractor's previous contract with the City dated March 1, 2010 shall continue to guide service delivery between the Date of Execution and the Date of Commencement of Service of this new Contract, with the exception that the Contractor and the City agree that certain service improvements shall be implemented no later than September 1, 2019. These improvements are specified in Exhibit B. In the event that any conflict exists between the previous contract and the improved services specified in Exhibit B, the new services shall be adopted in preference to the previous contract standards. 4.2 Collection Services 4.2.1 Single-Family Residence Garbage Collection 4.2.1.1 Subject Materials The Contractor shall collect all Garbage placed at Curbside for disposal by Single-Family Residence Customers all properly prepared and contained materials in and adjacent to Garbage Carts, Cans, and bags. 4.2.1.2 Containers The Contractor shall provide collection Containers to Customers at no additional charge as part of the Customer-chosen service level. Garbage Carts shall be delivered by the Contractor to Single-Family Residence Customers within seven (7) days of the Customer's initial request. Each Customer's initial Container must be Contractor-provided Container, provided that Garbage in excess of the Customer's initial Container may be bundled or placed in a Customer-owned Can or plastic bag. 4.2.1.3 Specific Collection Requirements The Contractor shall offer regular weekly collection of the following service levels: 1. One 20-gallon Garbage Cart; 2. One 35 gallon Garbage Cart; City of Federal Way 26 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 3. One 64-gallon Garbage Cart; and 4. One 96-gallon Garbage Cart. The Contract shall also offer a service of once per month collection of non-putrescible waste in a 35- gallon Cart. Once each year through the use of an on-demand call-based service, the Contractor shall provide a curbside collection service to handle bulky materials at no additional charge to Single-Family Residence Customers. Each service shall accept two categories of bulky household items: (A) up to one (1) cubic yard of individual small items not larger than three (3) feet by three (3) feet, with each individual item weighing not more than fifty (50) pounds; and (B) up to three (3) larger items, including all appliances (white goods), mattresses, sofas, furniture, barbecues, carpet (in rolls no larger than six (6) feet in length and one (1) foot in diameter) and hot water tanks. The Contractor shall have discretion to refuse any Unacceptable Waste items, if instructions are provided to the Customer for proper disposal. Carry-out charges shall be assessed only to those Customers who choose to have the Contractor move Containers to reach the collection vehicle at its nearest point of access. Carry-out charges shall be assessed in twenty-five (25) foot increments only to those Customers for whom the Contractor must move a Container over five (5) feet to reach the curb at the collection vehicle's nearest point of access. Carry-out service Customers must place their Containers in a location visible from a collection vehicle at street level and along a fully paved access way. Garbage in excess of Container capacity or the subscribed service level shall be collected and properly charged as Extra Units to the Customer; with the exception of excess Garbage collection otherwise required under this Contract at no additional charge to the Customer. The Contractor shall maintain route lists in sufficient detail to allow accurate recording and charging of all Extra Units. Customers shall be allowed to specify that no Extra Units be collected without prior Customer notification (colloquially referred to as a "take no extra" account), which shall be provided by the Single-Family Residence Customer no less than one (1) business day prior to that Customer's regular collection. Collections shall be made from Single-Family Residences on a regular schedule on the same day and as close to a consistent time as possible. The Contractor's employees shall make collections in an orderly and quiet manner, and shall return all Containers, in an upright position, with lids closed and attached, to their original set out location. Extra charges may be assessed for materials loaded so as to lift the Can, or Garbage Cart lid in excess of six (6) inches from the normally closed position. Overweight Containers shall be left at the Curb and tagged with written notification as to why it was not collected. Customers may specify to the Contractor that they may not be charged for Extra Units, in which case any such Containers shall be left at the Curb uncollected and tagged with written notification as to why it was not collected. 4.2.2 Single-Family Residence Recyclables Collection 4.2.2.1 Recyclable Materials Residential Recyclables shall be collected from all participating Single-Family Residences Customers as part of basic Garbage collection services, without extra charge. If operational or recycling processing City of Federal Way 27 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract improvements are made that allow additional materials to be recycled at no additional cost to the Contractor, the Contractor agrees to expand the defined list of Residential Recyclables to cover such materials, subject to prior written approval by the City. The Contractor shall collect Curbside prepared and either called-in or set-out Recyclables as described in Exhibit C. 4.2.2.2 Containers The Contractor shall provide collection Containers to Customers at no charge. The default Recycling Cart size shall be 96-gallons, provided that the Contractor shall offer and provide 35- or 64-gallon Recycling Carts on request to those Single-Family Residence Customers requiring less capacity than provided by the standard 96-gallon Recycling Cart. Recycling Carts shall be delivered by the Contractor to new Single-Family Residence Customers, those Customers requesting replacements, or Customers that had previously rejected their Recycling Cart, within seven (7) days of the Customer's request. 4.2.2.3 Specific Collection Requirements Single-Family Residence Recyclables collection shall occur every-other-week on the same day as each household's Garbage and Compostables collection. Collections shall be made from Residences on a regular schedule on the same day and as close to a consistent time as possible. The Contractor shall collect on Public Streets and Private Roads in the same location as Garbage collection service is provided. The Contractor's employees shall make collections in an orderly, non-disruptive and quiet manner, and shall return Containers with their lids closed and attached to their set out location, and out of any Public Street, in an orderly manner. The defined list of Residential Recyclables in Exhibit C shall be collected from all participating Single- Family Residences as part of basic Garbage collection services, without extra charge. The Contractor shall collect all Residential Recyclables from Single-Family Residences that are placed in Contractor owned Carts or are boxed or placed in a paper bag next to the Customers' Recycling Cart. Recyclables must be prepared as described in Exhibit C and uncontaminated with food or other residues. No limits shall be placed on set-out volumes for Curbside Recyclables, other than those specifically listed in Exhibit C. In the event that large quantities of commercially-generated materials are consistently set out at a Single-Family Residence, the Contractor shall request the resident to use a larger Recycling Cart or use commercial recycling services for the excess volumes. If the resident continues to set out commercial quantities of Recyclables, the Contractor shall notify the City for further action. 4.2.3 Single-Family Residence Compostables Collection 4.2.3.1 Subject Materials Properly-prepared Compostables shall be collected from all Single-Family Residence Customers that subscribe and pay for that service. City of Federal Way 28 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.2.3.2 Containers The Contractor shall provide one Compostables Cart and collection service to each subscribing Customer at the specified rate and shall also provide additional Compostable Carts and service at the additional Compostable Cart fee provided in Exhibit E to Customers requesting that additional service. The default Compostables Cart size shall be 96-gallons, provided that the Contractor shall offer and provide 35- or 64-gallon Compostables Carts on request to those Single-Family Residence Customers subscribing to those lower levels of service. Excess Yard Debris material that does not fit in a Compostables Cart shall be bundled or placed in Kraft paper bags or properly labeled Customer-owned Cans. Customers choosing to use their own Can for excess Yard Debris shall be provided durable stickers by the Contractor that clearly identify the container's contents as "Yard Debris." Excess Yard Debris shall be charged at the Extra Compostables Unit rate specified in Exhibit E. Compostables Carts shall be delivered by the Contractor to new subscribing Customers and Customers requesting a replacement Compostables Cart within seven (7) days of the Customer's request. The Contractor shall include instructional materials regarding Food Scrap recycling via Compostables Carts, subject to the City's prior written approval. The Contractor shall provide an on-call fee-based Compostables Container cleaning service to Customers at the rate provided in Exhibit E. 4.2.3.3 Specific Collection Requirements Properly prepared Compostables shall be collected weekly on the same day as each household's Garbage and Recyclables collection from all subscribers. Collections shall be made from Single-Family Residence subscribers on a regular schedule on the same day and as close to a consistent time as possible. Compostables in excess of 96 gallons may be charged at the additional Cart rate (if that Customer has ordered one or more additional Compostables Carts) or as Compostables Extra Units in 32 gallon increments in accordance with Exhibit E. Upon direction from the City, for two collection cycles immediately following a City-designated storm event, up to 96 additional gallons of loose or bagged storm debris shall be accepted with regular quantities of Compostables without extra charge, provided that the materials are prepared and set-out as described for excess Yard Debris in the prior section. The City shall designate no more than three (3) storm events each calendar year. This service shall be available only to Compostables service subscribers. Compostables may be placed in Carts, paper bags, bundles, or relabeled Cans next to the initial Compostables Cart, provided that Food Scraps shall be contained in the initial Cart and only Yard Debris shall be placed in bags, bundles, or open cans. The Contractor shall collect on Public Streets and Private Roads in the same location as Garbage collection is provided. The Contractor's employees shall make collections in an orderly and quiet City of Federal Way 29 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract manner, and shall return Containers in an upright position, with lids attached, to their set out location and out of the public street. Upon one-hundred-eighty-days (180) written notice from the City, the Contractor shall shift Single- Family Residence Compostables collection from subscription-based to embedded in Customer's Garbage rates. In the event that the City implements this option, subscribers shall no longer be charged fees for their initial Compostables Cart service and the Single-Family Garbage rates in Exhibit E shall be increased by$9.48/month plus the City's then-current Administration Fee and corresponding State B&O tax on the Administrative Fee related to this increase, subject to the rate modification provisions of Section 5.3.1. 4.2.4 Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customer Garbage Collection 4.2.4.1 Subject Materials The Contractor shall collect all Garbage set out for disposal by Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers in or properly prepared and contained materials next to Containers. 4.2.4.2 Containers Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers shall be offered a full range of Container and service options, including Garbage Carts, one (1) through eight (8) cubic yard non-compacted Detachable Containers, and collection from one (1)through six (6) cubic yard Customer-owned or leased compacted Detachable Containers. Containers shall be provided to Customers at no charge, except for compacting Containers or unless otherwise set forth in this Contract and directed by the City. Materials in excess of Container capacity or the subscribed service level shall be collected and properly charged as Extra Units as directed by the City. The Contractor shall develop and maintain route lists in sufficient detail to allow accurate recording and charging of all Extra Units. The Contractor may use either or both front-load or rear-load Detachable Containers to service Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers. However, not all collection sites within the City Service Area may be appropriate for front-load collection due to limited maneuverability or overhead obstructions. The Contractor shall provide Containers and collection services capable of servicing all Customer sites, whether or not front-load collection is feasible. Containers shall be delivered by the Contractor to requesting Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers within three (3) days of the Customer's initial request. 4.2.4.3 Specific Collection Requirements Collections from both Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers shall be made on a regular schedule on the same day and as close to a consistent time as possible to minimize Customer confusion. The Contractor shall provide locks for Containers upon request and remove and replace Containers from enclosures and position (roll-out) Containers up to twenty-five (25) feet for Garbage (and Recycling and Compostable) collection at no additional charge. Additional roll-out charges may be assessed in twenty- City of Federal Way 30 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract five (25) foot increments only to those Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers for whom the Contractor must move a Container over twenty-five (25) feet to reach the collection vehicle at its nearest point of access. Extra charges may be assessed for materials loaded so as to lift the Container lid in excess of six (6) inches from the normally closed position. The Contractor shall not charge fees for either opening gates or unlocking containers. Customers with hard-to-access Containers requiring the Contractor to wait for Customer Container relocation or requiring Contractor's use of specialized equipment for Container relocation may charge those Customers additional access fees and/or hourly fees consistent with Exhibit E. Multifamily Complex and Commercial Garbage may request extra collections and shall pay a proportional amount of their regular monthly rate for that service as established by the City. 4.2.5 Multifamily Complex and Commercial Recyclables Collection 4.2.5.1 Subject Materials All properly prepared Recyclables listed in Exhibit C for Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers, shall be collected as part of the basic Garbage collection services, up to the specified quantity limit in Section 4.2.5.3 without extra charge. 4.2.5.2 Containers The Contractor shall provide Recycling Containers at no additional charge to all Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers requesting Containers. The Contractor shall encourage and promote participation in Recyclables and Compostables services and shall recommend appropriate relative Container sizes through its site visit and evaluation process. The Contractor shall encourage the use of Detachable Containers or Drop-box Containers instead of multiple Carts at locations where more than one cubic yard of Recycling capacity is provided, unless constraints favor the use of Carts. Containers used for the collection of Recyclables shall be delivered by the Contractor to requesting Customers within three (3) days of the Customer's initial request. The Contractor may decline to collect Recyclables if the Container in which they are placed by the Customer contains Excluded Materials or other materials that do not conform to the definition of Recyclables or that do not meet specifications. For Multifamily Complex Customers, Recyclables contamination reduction elements will be provided by the Contractor upon request or whenever contamination levels exceed established thresholds. Contractor-supplied contamination reduction elements specifically for Detachable Containers shall include: specialized lids with slots for depositing Recyclables, and functional lock bars and locks. Sufficient inventory specialized lids with slots shall be maintained to enable Container delivery standards set in Section 6.1. Multi-lingual recycling instruction decals shall be affixed to Detachable Containers upon request. City of Federal Way 31 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.2.5.3 Specific Collection Requirements Multifamily Complex and Commercial Recyclables collection shall occur at least weekly or more frequently (but not more than three times per week) if space constraints preclude providing sufficient weekly capacity. Commercial Customers shall be subject to a two 96-gallon Recycling Cart limit. In cases where multiple tenants share Garbage service, each tenant shall be considered and set-up as a separate Customer for the purposes of receiving up to two 96-gallon Recycling Carts. Multifamily Customers shall be collected without limit. Commercial Customers requiring additional capacity may select any vendor (including the Contractor) and procure those services outside of this Contract. In the event that the Contractor provides those additional services at rates negotiated between the Contractor and the Commercial Customer, the following fee cap will apply: the combined fee for separate Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables collection services may not be any greater than the equivalent monthly Garbage fee for that same volume of material. The provision of fee-based Commercial Recycling shall comply with the service and billing standards of this Contract, but at market rates subject to the combined fee cap described above. Collections shall be made on a regular schedule on the same day(s) of the week and as close to a consistent time as possible to minimize Customer and tenant confusion. The Contractor's employees shall make collections in an orderly, non-disruptive, and quiet manner, and shall return Containers after emptying to the same location as found, with their lids closed. The Contractor shall provide suitable locks for all Container types upon request at no charge. The Contractor shall remove and replace Containers from enclosures and position (roll-out) Containers up to twenty-five (25) feet for Garbage (and Recycling and Compostable) collection at no additional charge. Additional roll-out charges may be assessed in twenty-five (25) foot increments only to those Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers for whom the Contractor must move a Container over twenty-five (25)feet to reach the collection vehicle at its nearest point of access. The Contractor shall not charge fees for either opening and closing gates, or unlocking and relocking gates and lids on Containers. 4.2.6 Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customer Compostables Collection The Contractor shall provide subscription-based Compostables collection services to requesting Multifamily Complexes and Commercial Customers. 4.2.6.1 Subject Materials The Contractor shall provide collection of Compostables from any requesting Multifamily Complex or Commercial Customer, subject to that Customer's continued compliance with material preparation requirements. Contaminated or oversized Compostables materials rejected by the Contractor shall be tagged in writing in accordance with the Contamination Reduction Plan with an appropriate problem notice explaining why the material was rejected. City of Federal Way 32 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.2.6.2 Containers Carts shall be provided to subscribers as part of the service at no additional charge. Compostables Containers shall be delivered by the Contractor to Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers within three (3) days of a Customer's request. The Contractor shall offer regular weekly and twice-weekly collection of the following service levels, at the rates set forth in Exhibit E: 1. One 35-gallon cart(weekly) 2. One 64-gallon cart(weekly or twice-weekly) 3. One 96-gallon cart(weekly or twice-weekly) 4.2.6.3 Specific Collection Requirements Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customer Compostables collection shall occur weekly or twice- weekly, as subscribed for and requested by the Customer. Collections shall be made on a regular schedule on the same day(s) of the week and as close to a consistent time as possible to minimize Customer confusion. The Contractor's employees shall make collections in an orderly and quiet manner, and shall return Containers after emptying to the same location as found, with their lids closed. Customers may, at their sole option, direct the Contractor to routinely re-line Compostables Carts with approved biodegradable liners for the per unit rate specified in Exhibit E. 4.2.7 Drop-Box Container Garbage Collection 4.2.7.1 Subject Materials The Contractor shall provide Drop-Box Container Garbage collection services to Customers, in accordance with the service level selected by the Customer. 4.2.7.2 Containers The Contractor shall pay the cost of procuring and providing Containers for Garbage meeting the standards described in Section 4.1.14. Both Customer-owned and Contractor-owned Drop-box Containers shall be serviced, including Customer-owned compactors. The Contractor shall maintain a sufficient Drop-box Container inventory to provide delivery of empty containers by the Contractor to new and temporary Customers within three (3) business days after the Customer's request. City of Federal Way 33 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.2.7.3 Specific Collection Requirements The Contractor shall provide dispatch service and equipment capable of collecting full Drop-box Containers on the same business day if the Customer's initial request is received by the call center before 10:00 a.m., and no later than the next business day if the Customer's initial call is received by the call center after 10:00 a.m. Drop-box Containers shall be delivered to new Customers within one business day of their request. The Contractor shall detach, remove and replace Drop-Box Containers from locked or unlocked enclosures at no additional charge. The Contractor may charge additional time and/or mileage only if (1) the Customer requests that Contractor deliver material to a facility other than the closest King County disposal facility, (2) the facility is one to which the Contractor is allowed to deliver the material under this Contract, and (3) Contractor delivers the material to such facility after advising the Customer in writing (e-mail is acceptable) as to the basis of the additional time and/or mileage charges to be payable by the Customer on account of such delivery(ies). Additional mileage charges shall be assessed on a one-way basis and shall only apply to mileage in excess of the distance to the closest County authorized disposal facility appropriate for the material type being hauled. 4.2.8 Temporary(Non-Special Event) Container Customers The Contractor shall maintain a sufficient Container inventory, including Detachable Container and Drop-box Containers, to provide delivery of empty Containers by the Contractor to temporary Customers within three (3) business days after the Customer's initial request. The charges for temporary Detachable Container service as listed in Exhibit E shall include delivery, collection, distance, and disposal or processing for Recyclables or Compostables. No additional fees other than those included in Exhibit E may be charged. Temporary Garbage services do not include collection and shall not exceed ninety (90) days in duration. Customers requiring service for more than ninety (90) days shall subscribe for regular combined Garbage, Recycling, and Compostables service. 4.2.9 Special Event Services Contractor shall provide temporary Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Containers and signage for Customers' special events within the Service Area at the rates listed in Exhibit E. Contractor shall provide such Customers with assistance in determining Container needs and signage for Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables at the special events, including site visits and technical assistance to ensure that the maximum Recyclables and Compostables diversion is achieved. Contractor shall coordinate their efforts with the City, and provide such Customers and the City with a summary of the volumes and tonnages of materials disposed of and diverted for recycling and composting. Contractor shall provide these special event services as a bundle, with each event providing collection of Recyclables and Compostables as part of the event Garbage collection service. The provision of Garbage- only service for special events shall only be provided on a case-by-case basis upon prior written approval of the City. City of Federal Way 34 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.2.10 City Services The Contractor shall provide Garbage, Recyclables and Compostables collection to all City-owned municipal facilities, parcels, and parks as a part of this Agreement at no additional charge. The service levels for each City facility listed may be changed at the City's discretion and at no additional cost to the City. Of the Parks Facilities listed below, those with an "*' shall receive seasonal and/or year-round collection services on site, using Detachable Containers or Carts at the City's direction. Contractor shall not be anticipated to provide scheduled collection services at the other listed Parks. At the City's discretion and at no additional cost to the City, any City-owned facilities or parcels may receive occasional temporary Compostables, Recyclables, or Garbage services (typically via Drop-Box Container) in support of City maintenance of these sites. Facilities and parks include, but are not limited to, the following: FACILITY ADDRESS City Facilities: Federal Way City Hall 33325 8th Avenue S Brooklake Community Center 726 S 356th Street Celebration Park Maintenance Site 1095S324 Ih Street Dumas Bay Centre/Knutzen Theatre 3200 SW Dash Point Road Evidence Building 600 S 333rd Street Federal Way Community Center 876 S 333rd Street Steel Lake Maintenance Facility 31132 28th Avenue S SWR Storage Shed 700 S 333rd Street Town Center Parcels 2141 S 314th Street Performing Arts & Events Center 31510 Pete von Reichbauer Way S Historical Society Facility 2645 S 312th Street City Parks: Adelaide 30619 16th Avenue SW Alderbrook 32730 17th Avenue SW Alderdale 2700 SW 340th Place BPA Trail 1100 S 324th Street Camelot Open Space 29200 45th Avenue S Cedar Grove 2200 S 333rd Street *Celebration 1095 S 324th Street Coronado 2501 SW 349th Place Dash Point Highlands 5300 SW 324th Street Dash Point Triangle 31200 SW Dash Point Road Dumas Bay Sanctuary 30844 44th Avenue SW Federal Way Entry Sign 2800 S 320th Street Fisher's Pond 31850 7th Avenue SW *French Lake 31531 1st Avenue S Heritage Woods 28200 24th Place S Hylebos/ Blueberry Farm 630 S 356th Street City of Federal Way 35 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Hylebos/ Historic Cabins 34915 4th Avenue S Lake Grove 833 SW 308th Street Lake Killarney 3500 Weyerhaeuser Way S *Lakota 31334 SW Dash Point Road Laurelwood 2301 S 292nd Street Madrona 1500 SW 356th Street Mirror Lake 915 S 315th Street Olympic View 2900 SW 330th Street Palisades 5039 SW Dash Point Road Panther Lake Open Space and Trail 550 SW Campus Drive Poverty Bay Open Space 2500 SW 301st Street *Sacajawea 1401 S Dash Point Road *Saghalie 33914 19th Avenue SW Sculpture Park 2031 S 316th Street Spring Valley Open Space Various Parcels *Steel Lake/Steel Lake Annex 2410 S 312th Street SW 312th Sports Court 100 SW 312th Street *Town Square 31600 Pete von Reichbauer Way S Wedgewood 3913 SW 337th Street West Campus Trail 200 S 320th Street *West Hylebos Wetlands 411 S 348th Street *Westway Substation/Tract 33400 21st Avenue SW Wildwood 2315 S 300th Street Winco 106 SW Campus Drive At any time during the Term of this Contract, the City may add up to five City facilities and up to five additional City parks to be subject to the service specifications in the section, in addition to those listed above. In cases in which Garbage, Recyclables, or Compostables are generated through the performance by third parties of services for the City outside of the normal operation of a municipal facility, Contractor may charge for the collection of such materials in accordance with charges listed in Exhibit E. Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables generated at all City facilities in the ordinary course of their operations, however, whether generated by City staff or affiliated personnel, facility users, or third parties (e.g., janitorial contractor or site management contractor) will be collected by the Contractor without charge to the City. Tenants or other occupants of a municipal facility, other than those who operate the facility as a City contractor of municipal services, may be charged by Contractor in accordance with this Contract for collection services for Garbage, Recyclables and Compostables as a typical customer. The Contractor shall provide collection of designated on-street Litter and Recyclables receptacles within the City, as directed by the City and paid by the City at the per collection rate in Exhibit E. Collection shall occur not less than one (1) time each week and up to three (3) times each week, depending on season and need, at the direction of the City. Uncontaminated Recyclables collected from these receptacles will be separated, processed, and recycled. Contractor shall line all of these receptacles after each collection, with liners supplied by the Contractor. The Contractor shall also provide, maintain, and service a City of Federal Way 36 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract minimum of six (6) Big Belly compacting Garbage receptacles at no additional cost, to be sited and installed as approved by the City no later than September 1, 2021. 4.2.11 Community Events The Contractor shall provide support for up to five (5) City-sponsored events each year. That support shall include Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables collection as necessary, including delivery, placement, collection, disposal/diversion of materials, and removal of Containers after the event. Additional event services for public (above the five (5) provided at no cost each year) or all events conducted by private Customers shall be charged at the rate listed in Exhibit E. Rates are all-inclusive for delivery, setup, collection services, and removal of event containers, similar to specifications in Section 4.2.9. 4.2.12 On-call Bulky Waste Collection The Contractor shall provide on-call fee-based Bulky Waste collection to any Customer, including Multifamily and Commercial Customers. On-call collection of Bulky Waste shall be provided by the Contractor to Customers by appointment for no more than the charge set forth in Exhibit E to this Contract, with collection occurring no later than five (5) business days after a Customer initial request. Customers must place Bulky Waste at the regular Garbage collection location no more than twenty-four (24) hours prior to collection. The Contractor shall notify the Customer of the specific date that their item will be collected, the charge that will be made to their next bill, and where the item should be placed for collection. The Contractor shall recycle all metal appliances, unless another arrangement is approved in writing by the City, and to make a reasonable effort to recycle all other materials collected. The Contractor shall direct Customers to remove doors from refrigerators and freezers before collection and not to place Bulky Waste at the Curb prior to twenty-four (24) hours before scheduled collection. On-call Bulky Waste collection must occur during the hours and days specified in Section 4.1.3, with the exception that Saturday collection is permissible if it is more convenient for Customers. 4.2.13 Excluded Services This Contract does not include the collection or disposal of Unacceptable Waste. 4.3 COLLECTION SUPPORT AND MANAGEMENT The Contractor shall provide collection support and management consistently throughout the term of this Contract and in compliance with the provisions under the following subsections. City of Federal Way 37 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.3.1 General Customer Service The Contractor shall be responsible for providing all Customer service functions, including, but not limited to: • Answering Customer telephone calls and e-mail or electronically communicated requests; • Requesting at start of service Customer's preference for notification of service changes via robo- calls, texts, or emails, and confirming and updating these preferences periodically; • Asking Customers at start of service their preference for receiving Contractor's welcome packet and subsequent outreach and account information electronically or via mail; • Informing Customers of current, new, and optional services and charges; • Handling Customer subscriptions and cancellations; • Receiving and resolving Customer complaints; • Dispatching Drop-box Containers, temporary containers, and special collections; • Billing; • Maintaining and updating regularly as necessary a user-friendly internet website; and • Maintaining and updating regularly as necessary a user-friendly mobile application. 4.3.2 Specific Customer Service Requirements The Contractor shall maintain a service base for storing and/or maintaining collection vehicles within twenty-five (25) miles of the City's corporate limits. Operations and management staff shall be located at that site, provided that call center operations may be remotely provided. The Contractor's call center shall be open at a minimum from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekdays, and no less than four (4) hours on Saturdays. Customer service representatives shall be available through the Contractor's call center during these hours for communication with the public and City representatives. During these hours, customer calls shall be handled by Contractor's staff, not by voice mail. Outside of the call center's open hours, the Contractor shall have an answering or voice mail service available to record messages from all incoming telephone calls. The holiday collection schedule described in Section 4.1.6 shall also apply to Customer service coverage. The Contractor shall maintain a twenty-four (24) emergency telephone number for use by the City. The Contractor shall have a representative, or an answering service to contact such representative, available at such emergency telephone number for City-use during all hours, including normal Office Hours. Inability to reach the Contractor's staff via the emergency telephone number shall be cause for performance fees in accordance with Section 6.1.2. City of Federal Way 38 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.3.2.1 Customer Service Representative Staffing During call center hours, the Contractor shall maintain sufficient staff to answer and handle complaints and service requests from all Customers without delay. If incoming telephone call volumes necessitate, the Contractor shall increase staffing levels as necessary to meet Customer service demands. The Contractor shall proactively recruit, train, and schedule customer service staff to avoid underperforming during periods of high call volume, and to replace in a timely manner customer service staff lost due to attrition. The Contractor shall maintain sufficient staffing to answer and handle all Customer complaints and service requests in a timely manner, whether made by telephone, letter, e-mail, mobile message, or webpage/"chat" message. If staffing is deemed to be insufficient by the City to handle Customer complaints and service requests in a timely manner, the Contractor shall increase staffing levels to meet and maintain performance criteria as established in Section 4.3.2.4. To manage the anticipated temporary increase of customer contacts, the Contractor shall provide additional customer service staffing during the transition and implementation period, specifically from six (6) weeks prior to the Date of Commencement of Service, through the end of the fourth month after the Date of Commencement of Service, to ensure that sufficient staffing is available to minimize Customer waits and inconvenience. The Contractor shall receive no additional compensation for increased staffing levels during the transition and implementation period. Staffing levels during the transition and implementation period shall be subject to the City's prior review and approval. 4.3.2.2 City Access to Contractor's Customer Service Information The Contractor shall maintain staff that has management level authority to provide a point of contact for all City inquiries, requests, and coordination covering the full range of Contractor activities related to this Contract. Contractor duties include, but are not limited to: • Promotion and outreach to Single-Family Residences, Multifamily Complexes, Commercial, and community event Customers; • Serving as an ombudsperson, providing quick resolution of all Customers' issues, complaints, and inquiries; and • Assisting the City with program development and design, research, response to inquiries, and troubleshooting issues. Contractor shall employ a designated service expert team, which shall be accessible by the City and City- designated representatives to address emerging problems as needed. This service expert team shall be available during regular Office Hours and, if not responding immediately to a City inquiry, a service expert team employee is required to return City-initiated messages (whether originated via telephone, mobile messaging, or e-mail) within four(4)working hours of receipt. 4.3.2.3 Service Recipient Complaints and Corrective Requests The Contractor shall record all complaints and corrective requests made to Contractor to resolve issues related to establishing service or subsequent issues arising once service is established, regardless of how City of Federal Way 39 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract received. The Contractor's records shall including nature of complaint or request, date, time, Customer's name and address, method of transmittal, and nature, date and manner of resolution of the complaint or service request in a computerized daily log. Any complaints received through the Contractor's voice mail or answering service shall be entered in the log no later than the following business day. The Contractor shall dedicate adequate resources and shall make a conscientious effort to respond directly to all Customers and resolve all complaints within one business day of the original phone call, letter, or electronic communication, and shall complete all service requests within the time limits as established throughout this Contract. If a longer response time is necessary to resolve complaints or related corrective requests, the circumstances that have caused the delay shall also be noted in the log to document the Contractor's efforts to resolve the complaint or request. The Customer service log shall be managed via software and be available for inspection by the City, or its designated representatives, during the Contractor's Office Hours, and shall be in a format approved by the City. The Contractor shall provide a copy of this log in an electronic format from the Microsoft Office suite (or other City-approved format) of software to the City with the monthly report. 4.3.2.4 Handling of Customer Calls All incoming telephone calls shall be answered promptly and courteously, with an average speed of answer of less than thirty (30) seconds. No telephone calls shall be placed on hold for more than two (2) minutes per occurrence, and on a monthly basis, no more than ten percent (10%) of incoming telephone calls shall be placed on hold for more than twenty (20) seconds. Contractor shall include aggregated weekly call volume data for the Service Area in the monthly reporting that tracks ongoing compliance with these specifications. A Customer shall be able to talk directly with a Customer service representative when calling the Contractor's Customer service telephone number during call center operating hours without navigating an automated phone answering system through more than one level of menus. An automated voice mail service or phone answering system may be used outside of call center operating hours. A Customer calling into the Customer service phone lines and placed on hold shall hear on-hold information consisting solely of City-specific information or Contractor promotional information that is applicable and not misleading to Customers. 4.3.2.5 Corrective Measures Upon the receipt of Customer complaints in regard to busy signals or excessive delays in responding to customer service requests, the City may request the Contractor submit a plan to the City for correcting the problem. Contractor shall submit this plan within five (5) working days of the City's request. Once the City has approved the plan, the Contractor shall immediately begin implementation of these corrective measures and shall report on implementation at least weekly. Contractor shall have thirty (30) days to fully implement the corrective measures, except during the transition and implementation period from one (1) month prior to the Date of Commencement of Service, through the end of the fourth month after the Date of Commencement of Service, during which upon City notification, the Contractor shall have five (5) working days to fully implement corrective measures. Failure to provide corrective measures shall result in performance fees for the Contractor as specified in Section 6.1. City of Federal Way 40 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.3.2.6 Contractor Internet Website The Contractor shall maintain a website containing information specific to the City's collection programs, including at a minimum contact information, collection schedules, current day of collection map, material preparation requirements, available services and options, rates and fees, inclement weather service changes with updates several times per day in the event of inclement weather, as well as updates that apply to those Customers whose services were impacted by inclement weather on prior days, and other relevant service information for its Customers. The website shall include live contact function for Customer communication with the Contractor, and the ability for Customers to submit service requests and manage their services on-line. Electronic Customer service requests shall be answered within one (1) business day of receipt. The website shall be professionally designed, including usability testing prior to submittal to the City for approval a minimum of three (3) months prior to the Date of Commencement of Service of this Contract. The website will be maintained and continually updated by Contractor. Significant website reformatting shall be subject to the City's prior approval throughout the term of this Contract. The Contractor shall provide among its local staff a knowledgeable and proficient website manager that is responsive to the City's request(s) for changes to the Contractor's website. Changes requested by the City consisting of textual messages only shall be uploaded to the website within seventy-two (72) hours of the time of the request(s). Changes requested by the City, of a textual nature, that are related to an emergency or time-sensitive situation (such as an inclement weather event, windstorm, or event preventing access to a Customer's regular place of container set-out) shall be uploaded to the website as soon as possible and not more than six (6) hours from of the time of request. Changes requested by the City that include a graphical component must be uploaded to the website within five (5) working days of the time of the request. The Contractor shall provide timely updates to the website, and provide links to the City's website, and Contractor shall check on a monthly basis to ensure that all links are current and correct any that no longer function. The website shall include core information (including at a minimum: how to establish service, preparation and set-out instructions, and rate information) in English and Spanish. The website shall also provide statements on its City-specific homepage in other commonly used non-English languages within the City referring Customers to the Contractor's translation helpline or a separate webpage with an appropriate translation function. Upon the City's request, the Contractor shall provide a website utilization report indicating the usage of various website pages and e-mail option. 4.3.2.7 Full Knowledge of Garbage, Recyclables,and Compostables Programs Required The Contractor's Customer service representatives shall be fully knowledgeable of all collection services available to Customers, including the various services available to Single-Family Residence, Multifamily Complex, and Commercial Customers. For new Customers, Customer service representatives shall explain all Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables collection options available depending on the sector the Customer is calling from. For existing Customers, the representatives shall explain new services and options, and resolve recycling issues (including providing support for Contamination Reduction Plan inquires), collection concerns, missed pickups, container deliveries, and other Customer concerns. Customer service representatives shall be trained to inform Customers of Recyclables and Compostables City of Federal Way 41 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract preparation specifications. Customer questions related to City policy shall be forwarded to the City for response. The Contractor's Customer service representatives shall have instantaneous electronic access to Customer service data and history to facilitate providing excellent customer service. The Contractor shall provide the City with a comprehensive outline of the Contractor's internal customer service representative training and support information specific to the City, and allow the City to periodically review and check Contractor's internal information accessed by customer service representatives to provide to Customers. Routine revisions to these materials shall be made by the Contractor on an ongoing basis, but any substantial revisions to this internal information shall be approved in writing by the City prior to being used by customer service representatives. The Contractor shall also provide the City with up to ten (10) dormant (non-serviced) accounts in various sectors and service modes to facilitate City monitoring of Customer communications and billing protocols. These non-serviced accounts shall be established in conjunction with the City and related data shall be fully accessible by the City. Contractor will manage these accounts as if the City were a typical Customer. 4.3.2.8 Customer Communications All Customer communications (other than routine service and billing interactions with individual Customers) shall be reviewed and approved in writing by the City before distribution. The City and Contractor recognize that Customer preferences for their method of communication may change during the Term of this Contract and agree to adjust customer service expectations to match Customer preferences. For example, if call traffic to the Contractor's telephone-based call center reduces over time and is supplanted by an increase in texting, the Contractor shall shift staff resources accordingly to ensure sustained high levels of customer service. The City and Contractor agree to review Contract requirements periodically and negotiate in good faith any desired improvements to the Contract service standards related to customer service delivery. 4.3.3 Contractor's Customer Billing Responsibilities The Contractor shall work with the City to determine the best way to handle transition billing between the City's old contract with the Contractor and this new Contract during the development of the Contractor's Transition and Implementation Plan, with the objective of minimizing Customer confusion and inconvenience. The Contractor shall be responsible for all billing functions related to the collection services required under this Contract. Single-Family Residential shall be billed quarterly and all other Customers shall be billed monthly. In no case shall a Customer's invoice be past due prior to the receipt of all services covered by the billing period. The Contractor's billing cycle parameters include, but are not limited to the service period, invoice date, due date, late fee date, reminder date(s), Container removal and stop- service date. The City reserves the right to review and provide feedback on the bill template used by the Contractor as to format and design to ensure Customer satisfaction. The Contractor shall evaluate and may incorporate the City's recommendations in good faith. Billing and accounting costs associated with City of Federal Way 42 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Customer invoicing, including credit card fees, shall be borne by the Contractor, and are included in the service fees in Exhibit E. The Contractor may charge deposits for temporary services and bill to Customers late payments and "non-sufficient funds" check charges, as well as the costs of bad debt collection, under policies and amounts that have been previously approved in writing by the City. The Contractor shall offer paperless billing, including an autopay/electronic notification function that allows Customer to set up autopay and receive an e-mail or text notification of the amount and draw date of the payment, without requiring the Customer to navigate to the Contractor's website to obtain that information. Customers may temporarily suspend collection services due to vacations or other reasons for as long and as often as desired with an initial two (2) week minimum plus additional one (1) week increments and be billed pro-rata for actual services received. The Contractor may charge an extended vacation hold/standby fee as listed in Exhibit E instead of retrieving Carts for those Customers who request a vacation hold greater than one month in duration. The Contractor shall be responsible for the following: • Generating combined Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables collection bills for all Customers; • Generating bills printed double-sided, on at least thirty percent (30%) post-consumer recycled- content paper; • Generating bills that include at a minimum a statement indicating the Customer's current service level, current charges and payments, appropriate taxes and fees, Customer service contact information and website information; • Generating bills that clearly state the date at which late fees will be assessed for non-payment; • Generating bills that have sufficient space on the front or back of the bill for educational or informational messaging, as directed by the City; • Accepting automatic ongoing payments from Customers via debit or credit card, checking or savings account withdrawal, or by wire transfer. No transaction fees may be levied on any Customer payments; • Accepting, processing, and posting payment data each business day; • Printing and inserting bill inserts designed by the City for Customer sectors —with paper copies added to mailed invoices, and hyperlinked versions for on-line/paperless accounts; • Maintaining a system to monitor Customer subscription levels, record excess Garbage or Compostables collected, place an additional charge on the Customer's bill for the excess collection, and charge for additional services requested and delivered. This system shall maintain a Customer's historical account data for a period of not less than six (6) years from the end of the fiscal year in accordance with the City's record retention policy, and in a manner that City of Federal Way 43 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract is instantaneously accessible to Customer service representatives needing to refer to Customer service data and history; • Accepting and responding to Customer requests for service level changes, missed or inadequate collection services, and additional services; • Collecting unpaid charges from Customers for properly invoiced services; and • Implementing rate changes as specified in Section 5.3. The Contractor shall be required to maintain procedures to backup and minimize the potential for the loss or damage of the account servicing (e.g., Customer service, service levels, and billing history) database. The Contractor shall ensure that at a minimum a daily backup of the account servicing database is made and stored off-site. The Contractor shall also provide the City with a copy of the account servicing database (excluding Customer financial information such as credit card or bank account numbers) sorted by Customer sector via e-mail, FTP site or electronic media upon request. The City shall have unlimited rights to use such account servicing database for the purpose of developing targeted educational and outreach programs, analyzing service level shifts or rate impacts, and/or providing information to successor contractors. Within one (1) business day of request, the Contractor shall provide the City with a paper and/or software compatible copy (at the City's discretion) of City-requested Customer information and history, including but not limited to Customer names, service and mailing addresses, contact information, service levels, and current account status. 4.3.4 Reporting The Contractor shall provide monthly, annual, and ad hoc reports to the City. The Contractor report formats may be modified from time to time at the City's request at no cost to the City. In addition, the Contractor shall allow City staff access to pertinent operations information related to compliance with the obligations of this Contract, including, but not limited to, vehicle route assignment and maintenance logs, Garbage, Recyclables, and/or composting facility certified weight slips, and Customer charges and payments. 4.3.4.1 Monthly Reports On a monthly basis, by the last working day of each month, the Contractor shall provide a report containing the following information for the previous month. Reports shall be submitted in an electronic format approved by the City and shall be certified as accurate by the Contractor. At minimum, reports shall include: 1. A billing summary that provides the number of Customers billed at each service level (e.g., by container size, extra services) for each service sector (e.g., Single-family Residence, Multifamily Complex, Commercial Customers, and Drop-box hauls by Container size), the total number of Customers for each type of service by sector, Customer receipts by each service level, and total billings. City of Federal Way 44 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 2. A log of all Customer requests, complaints, inquiries, and site visits, including Customer name, property name and address, date of contact or site visit, reason for site visit, and a summary of the resolution or results of these Customer requests, complaints, and inquiries. 3. Reports from the Contractor's customer service telephone system summarizing daily data for total call volume, total calls answered, and average speed of answer. 4. Website utilization report showing total number of Customers managing their services on-line, total number of e-mails received via website, data on website usage, and other data or information as the City may require. 5. A summary of total Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables quantities collected (in tons) for each collection sector by month and year-to-date. The summary shall include program participation statistics including: a summary of Multifamily Complex and Commercial participation in recycling programs and set-out statistics for Residential Garbage, Compostables, and Recyclables collection services. Where item counts are more appropriate for certain Recyclables or Bulky Wastes (e.g., appliances, bulky materials, etc.), reporting item counts is acceptable. The summary shall include the names of facilities used for all materials and the total monthly tonnage delivered to each facility. 6. A summary of Recyclables quantities, contamination levels and processing residues disposed as Garbage. 7. A description of any vehicle accidents, infractions, and reported leaks. 8. A description of any changes to collection routes, Containers, vehicles (including back-up vehicles with the truck number and date of use to track limits on vehicle use), customer service provision, or any other related activities affecting the provision of services. 9. A description of any promotion, education, and outreach efforts, including Contamination Reduction Plan outcomes and including samples of distributed materials, and summary of any feedback or response received from Customers. 10. A description of Contractor activities and tonnages for City services and events. If collection vehicles are used to service more than one Customer sector per route or per load, the Contractor shall develop an apportioning methodology that allows the accurate calculation and reporting of collection volumes and quantities from the different sectors. The apportioning methodology shall be subject to the prior review and written approval of the City, and shall be periodically verified through field-testing by the Contractor. City of Federal Way 45 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 4.3.4.2 Annual Reports On an annual basis, by the first working day of March, the Contractor shall provide a report containing the following information for the previous year: 1. A consolidated summary and tabulation of the monthly reports, described above. 2. A discussion of highlights and other noteworthy experiences, along with measures taken to resolve problems, increase efficiency, and increase participation in, and volume of, Recyclables and Compostables collection programs. 3. A discussion of opportunities and challenges expected during the current year, including steps planned to take advantage of opportunities and resolve the challenges. 4. A discussion of promotion, education, and outreach efforts, and accomplishments for each sector. 5. An inventory of current collection vehicles and other major equipment, including model, year, make, serial or VIN number, assigned vehicle number, mileage (if vehicle), and collection sector. 6. A list of Multifamily Complexes eligible for Recycling and Compostables collection service but not receiving one or both services, with the results of required contacts made by Contractor during the year to promote the Recycling and/or Compostables service to those complexes, including the reason why the Multifamily Complex is not receiving Recycling and/or Compostables service. 7. A list of Commercial Customers eligible for Recycling and Compostables collection service but not receiving one or both services, with the results of required contacts made by Contractor during the year to promote the Recycling and/or Compostables service to those sites, including the reason why the Commercial Customer is not receiving Recycling and/or Compostables service. 8. A summary of the monthly logs of Customer requests, complaints, inquiries, site visits, and resolutions or results, as required in Section 4.3.4.1. The summary shall organize Customer requests, complaints, inquiries, and site visits by category (e.g., missed pickups, improper set- ups). The annual report shall be specific to the City's operations, written in a format appropriate for contract management and shall not be a generalized listing of Contractor activities in the region or elsewhere. 4.3.4.3 Ad Hoc Reports The City may request and receive from the Contractor up to twelve (12) ad hoc reports each year, at no additional cost to the City. These reports may include customer service database tabulations to identify specific service level or participation patterns or other similar information. Reports shall be provided in a City-defined format and with Microsoft software (or other City-approved software) compatibility. These City of Federal Way 46 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract reports shall not require the Contractor to expend more than one hundred (100) staff hours per year to complete. Contractor shall respond to Ad Hoc Report requests within five working days. 4.3.4.4 Other Reports If requested by the City, the Contractor shall provide daily route information for all service sectors and collection streams for the purpose of evaluating potential collection system changes during the Term of the Contract. 4.3.5 Promotion and Education The Contractor, at its own cost and at the direction of the City, shall have primary responsibility for developing, designing, executing, and distributing public promotion, education, and outreach programs. The Contractor shall also have primary responsibility for Customer recruitment, providing annual service-oriented information and outreach to Customers, distributing City-developed promotional and educational pieces at the City's direction, and implementing on-going recycling promotion, education, and outreach programs at the direction of the City. The Contractor shall also coordinate and work cooperatively with City staff and/or consultants hired to conduct outreach and education, and otherwise provide technical assistance. The City and Contractor shall jointly plan the Contractor's specific promotion and education program for the following year, including updating outreach materials and/or refining targeted audiences. The City may elect to assist the Contractor with development of promotional material layout and text, as staff time allows, otherwise the Contractor shall be responsible for all design and production. All promotional, educational, and informational materials provided by the Contractor to Customers in connection with the Contract shall be designed, developed, printed, and delivered by the Contractor, at the Contractor's cost, and subject to the City's final written approval as to form, content, and method of delivery. The City shall review and approve all materials with a minimum review period of two (2) weeks provided in all cases by the Contractor to allow sufficient time for review and approval. Each year, the Contractor shall produce and deliver an annual comprehensive service packet to all Single-Family and Multifamily Residences in the Service Area (including non-subscribers) which shall include, at a minimum, information on the proper disposal of Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables; rate information; disposal options for difficult-to-recycle items and hazardous wastes; the annual service schedule calendar; contact information; and any other pertinent information. The annual packet may be distributed in print or electronic format at the option of the resident. Each year, the Contractor shall produce and deliver an annual comprehensive service packet to all Multi- family and Commercial Customers in the Service Area which shall include, at a minimum, information on the proper disposal of Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables; rate information; disposal options for difficult-to-recycle items and hazardous wastes; contact information; and any other pertinent information. The annual packet may be distributed in print or electronic format at the option of the Customer. Upon request, Customers shall be provided with sufficient printed materials to distribute to tenants or lessees. City of Federal Way 47 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Specific procedures for Multifamily Complexes: The Contractor shall coordinate with the site manager or owner of Multifamily Complexes, either upon request and/or to facilitate coming into compliance with recycling volume thresholds or contamination thresholds. This may include door-to-door education, training of residents and/or property management staff, signage and posted information, addressing space and capacity constraints. The Contractor shall also coordinate and work cooperatively with City staff and/or consultants hired to conduct outreach and education, and otherwise provide technical assistance. Although subject to change over the term of this contract, the initial recycling volume thresholds are established as 0.12 cubic yards per week per unit (approximately 96 gallons per month) and a target of 5%or less contamination by volume. The following actions will be taken by Contractor whenever responding to contamination of Recyclables or Compostables at Multifamily Complexes. A combination of these actions shall be appropriate in cases where contamination is readily apparent prior to emptying Containers at the complex (which upon discovery by Contractor, or following a field determination made by the City, is termed a "Haul or Call" event). Failure to implement these actions will result in damages as specified in Section 6.1. • Immediately providing the City with photo documentation of the contamination, along with a record of container size, location within the Complex, and other pertinent information. • Specifically-tailored recycling service plans (establishing service volume and container location/access needs, auditing service levels/frequency/schedule, and verifying and monitoring related changes), as well as providing follow-up outreach as needed to achieve optimal participation and compliance with recycling participation regulations. • Monitoring tenant access to collection containers at the Complex, and the resulting contamination levels of recyclable materials, then implementing appropriate remedies by identifying the source or cause of contamination and then planning, assigning, and promoting corrective actions for: property management and site maintenance personnel, valet-style recycling service providers, and/or individual tenants as appropriate. This will then be followed by ongoing monitoring to ensure implementation of appropriate remedies. • Installation and/or use of lock bars/locks, specialized lids with slots for Detachable Container lids, and adjusting container size, placement/location, or service frequency in manners intended to reduce or eliminate contamination of Recyclables. • Distribution of outreach materials including: reusable tote bags for Recyclables, printed outreach materials, container decals, and instructional signage installation as needed. • Door-to-door canvassing and related on-site assistance to property management, maintenance staff, and residents as needed. • Pertinent training of on-site personnel including maintenance staff, volunteers, users of recycling services, and valet-style recycling service provider(s). • On-site visual surveys, tracking, and documentation as needed. • Other related assistance to encourage Multifamily Complex participation in ongoing recycling practices, focusing on the reduction and elimination of contamination sources and/or changing behaviors that result in contamination of recyclables. Specific procedures for Commercial Customers: The Contractor shall coordinate with Commercial Customer site managers or owners to provide outreach to tenants in multi-tenant buildings, office parks, and strip malls and similar situations where Contractor services are shared among tenants. Contractor shall do this either upon request and/or to City of Federal Way 48 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract facilitate coming into compliance with recycling volume thresholds or Recyclables and/or Compostables contamination reduction goals. This may include door-to-door education, training of tenants and/or property management staff, signage and posted information, and addressing space and capacity constraints. 4.3.6 Transition to Next Contractor The Contractor shall work with the City and any successive contractor in good faith to ensure minimal Customer disruption during the transition period from the City's previous contractor to the City's new Contractor. Container removal and replacement shall be coordinated between the Contractor and a successive contractor to occur simultaneously in order to minimize Customer inconvenience. In the event that the City does not elect to retain all Contractor's Containers pursuant to Section 4.1.15.3, the Contractor shall remove any Containers for all services or any portion of services provided under this Contract upon sixty(60) days' written notice from the City. Upon written request of the City at any time during the term of this Contract, the Contractor shall provide a detailed customer list, including customer name, service address, mailing address, and collection and container rental service levels to the City in Microsoft Excel format (or other City- approved format) within seven (7) days of the City's request. The parties recognize that a failure to comply with this provision will damage the City, but that determination of such damage will be difficult and burdensome; therefore, the parties agree that in the event of a breach of this provision the Contractor shall pay the City five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) for the material breach of this Contract provision. Payment shall be made within twenty (20) business days of the end of this Contract. The provisions of this section shall survive the termination or expiration of this Contract. S. COMPENSATION 5.1 Compensation to the Contractor 5.1.1 Rates The Contractor shall be responsible for billing and collecting funds from Single-family Residence, Multifamily Complex, and Commercial Customers in accordance with the charges for services listed in Exhibit E. The Contractor may reduce or waive at its option, but shall not exceed, the charges listed in Exhibit E. The payment of charges for services listed in Exhibit E by Customers shall comprise the entire compensation due to the Contractor. In the event that a Customer places Unacceptable Wastes in a Container, and the Contractor collects those materials inadvertently and incurs extraordinary expenses dealing with those materials, the Contractor may charge the Customer the actual costs of managing those materials, as approved by the City. Actual costs shall include additional transportation, handling, and disposal costs incurred by the Contractor for handling only those specific materials traceable to that Customer. City of Federal Way 49 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract The City is not required under this Contract to make any payments to the Contractor for the Services performed, or for any other reason, except as specifically described in this Contract, or for services the City obtains as a Customer. In the event that Contractor or a Customer desires solid waste-related services not specifically addressed in this Contract, the Contractor shall propose service parameters and a rate to the City in writing based on an average of adjacent WUTC tariffs. Upon the City's written approval, the Contractor may provide the requested services. In no case shall the Contractor provide unauthorized services or charge unauthorized rates. 5.1.2 Itemization on Invoices All applicable City, County, and Washington State solid waste or household hazardous waste taxes or fees, utility taxes, and (if allowed under the last paragraph of Section 5.1.2) sales taxes shall be itemized separately on Customer invoices and added to the charges listed in Exhibit E, except that the City Administrative Fees shall be included in Exhibit E rates and shall not be itemized separately on Customer invoices. Recycling commodity credit or debits shall be itemized on Single-Family Customer bills, in accordance with Section 5.3.4. Charges for excess Garbage or Compostables, Single-family, Multifamily Complex, and Commercial Compostables collection, Drop-box Container, On-call collection services, On-call fee-based Bulky Waste collection services, Container rentals, or temporary Container services shall be itemized on the Customer invoices separately by the Contractor, and may at no time exceed the charges set forth in Exhibit E. The County disposal fee as it exists on the date of execution or as thereafter modified shall be itemized separately on Customer invoices with charges for Drop-box Container service. The Contractor shall charge Drop-box Customers the actual disposal cost. The Contractor shall not separately charge sales tax for services that include any Container as part of the overall service package. Only Services that separate and itemize optional container rental (specifically Drop-box Container rental) shall have sales tax charged and listed on Customer invoices. The Contractor shall pay appropriate sales tax upon purchase of all equipment and Containers, and those costs are included in the rates provided in Exhibit E. In no case shall Customers be separately charged sales taxes paid by the Contractor on its equipment and Containers. Except as otherwise expressly provided for by the Contract, the Contractor shall not adjust or modify rates due to employee wage increases, changes in Compostables processing fees, Garbage collection service level shifts, or other changes affecting the collection system. City of Federal Way 50 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 5.2 Compensation to the City The Contractor shall pay to the City an Administrative Fee on or before the fifteenth day of each month during the term of this Contract, starting on October 15, 2020. The Administrative Fee shall be based on the gross revenues received by the Contractor from all Customers under this Agreement, excluding administrative fee, Drop-box disposal, or processing fees. The initial Administrative Fee shall be assessed at 3.2%of gross revenues received by the Contractor from those Customers since the last Administrative Fee payment period, consistent with the administrative fee calculations shown in Exhibit F. The Contractor's obligations to pay the Administrative Fee shall survive the termination date of this Contract until the Contractor is no longer receiving payments from Customers for services provided under this Contract. The rates included in Exhibit E, as modified during the term of this Contract, include the Administrative Fee, and Customers shall not be separately charged an itemized Administrative Fee. Exhibit F contains an example of how the Administrative Fee is included in rates, and lists the Contractor's service rate, the City's share of the retail rate, the State excise tax associated with the Administrative Fee, and the combined retail rate. Any adjustments to the Administrative Fee rate shall be calculated in a manner consistent with the example shown in Exhibit F. The Contractor shall fully participate with any City billing audit to confirm the Contractor's Customer receipts during any accounting period during the term of the Contract. The audit shall be confined to confirming Customer billing rates, Contractor receipts for services provided under this Contract and bad debt recovery. The City may change the Administrative Fee level in any year, provided that the change is synchronized with the annual Contractor rate modification described in Section 5.3.1. The City shall notify the Contactor of the new Administrative Fee for the following year by September 1, and the Contractor shall itemize and include the appropriate adjustment in its Rate Adjustment Statement provided October 1 of each year. In the event that the Administrative Fee is adjusted, either up or down, the Contractor shall add or subtract an amount equivalent to the state excise tax (1.5% in 2019), as may be adjusted from time to time by the State of Washington. In addition, the Contractor shall be responsible for payment of all applicable permits, licenses, fees, and taxes as described in Section 8.10, Permits and Licenses. 5.3 Compensation Adjustments 5.3.1 Annual CPI Service Component Modification The Contractor's collection service charges and miscellaneous fees and Contract options contained in Exhibit E, excluding waste disposal fees, for each level of service shall increase each year by one hundred percent (100%) of the annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI") for the Seattle- Tacoma-Bellevue Metropolitan Area for the U.S. City Average Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items (Revised Series) (CPI-W1982-84=100) prepared by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, or a replacement index. Adjustments shall be based on the twelve (12) month period ending June 30 of the previous year that the request for increase is made. For example, an City of Federal Way 51 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract adjustment to the Contractor's collection service charge for 2022 will be based on the CPI for the twelve (12) month period ending June 30, 2021. In the event that the CPI index series decreases year-to-year, the service component of Contractor rates shall remain unchanged, and the successive year's adjustment shall be based on the most recent June 30 CPI index value. In the event that the CPI index series increases over five percent (5%) year-to-year, the actual adjustment used shall be capped at five percent (5%), and the successive year's adjustment shall be based on the most recent June 30 CPI index value Adjustments to the Contractor's collection service charge shall be made in units of one cent ($0.01). Fractions less than one cent ($0.01) shall not be considered when making adjustments. Beginning January 1, 2022, Contractor's compensation shall be adjusted annually pursuant to this section. The Contractor shall submit in writing and electronic form to the City for review and verification a Rate Adjustment Statement, calculating the new rates for the next year, on or by October 1 of each year, starting October 1, 2021. In the event that the Contractor does not submit a Rate Adjustment Statement by October 1, the City shall calculate and unilaterally implement a rate adjustment based on the best available information as of October 1 of that year for the applicable period and the Contractor may not appeal this action. Upon completion of the City's review and verification, absent any City exception to the Contractor's calculations, the new rates shall take effect on January 1 of the following year. An example of rate adjustments due to CPI changes is provided in Exhibit F. 5.3.2 Changes in Disposal Fees Periodic adjustments shall be made to Contractor collection rates to reflect increases or decreases in County disposal fees for Garbage. In the event of a change in disposal fees, the disposal fee component of rates charged to Customers shall be adjusted, based on percentage increase or decrease in disposal fee applied to the disposal components included in Exhibit E of this Contract. Disposal fee changes shall be effective on the date of the County's implementation, provided that the Contractor has provided Customers 45-days' notification. Any change in the King County Garbage disposal fee between the Date of Execution and the Date of Service Commencement shall be handled as a normal disposal fee change applied as a pass-through on rates in accordance with this paragraph. An example of rate modifications due to disposal fee changes is provided in Exhibit F. 5.3.3 Changes in Disposal or Compostables Processing Sites If the Contractor is required by the City or other governmental authority to use Garbage disposal or Compostables processing sites other than those being used at the initiation of this Contract, the Contractor shall submit a detailed proposal for the adjustment of the rates to reflect any additional cost or savings to the Contractor. It is intended that the Contractor's rates pursuant to this Contract in such a case will be adjusted so as to pass through any resulting additional costs incurred by the Contractor to the Contractor or any additional savings to the Contractor to the City. The City and Contractor agree to negotiate in good faith to make any changes to the rates to accomplish a pass-through of any such costs or savings. City of Federal Way 52 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract If the Contractor is no longer able to find a processing site for all collected Compostables, after a good faith effort to locate a processing facility acceptable to the City, the City reserves the right to drop the collection of affected components of Compostables, such as Food Scraps, from the Contract and the City and the Contractor shall negotiate rate reduction in good faith to reflect the reduction in service. If the Contractor is subsequently able to find a processing site for Compostables or the site that was originally used for processing Compostables is able to resume taking the dropped materials, the City reserves the right to reinstate the collection of those materials and to reverse the previously agreed rate reduction for the reduction in service. 5.3.4 Recycling Market Adjustments The Parties agree that the value of collected Recyclables commodities shall be returned to Customers and that the Garbage rates included in Exhibit E include Recycling processing costs (including residual disposal) and exclude the value of Recyclables. The Contractor shall provide all Customers with a line item commodity credit/debit on their invoices. At commencement of services under this Contract, all Single-family Customers shall receive a commodity rebate of $1.00 per month and all Multifamily Complex and Commercial Customers shall receive the equivalent of a commodity rebate of$0.32 per yard of Garbage collected per month, based on $0.58 per yard for Multifamily Complex customers and $0.15 per yard for Commercial Customers as shown in Exhibit E. The Parties agree that this value reflects the Contractor's proposed initial commodity value of$54.07 per ton. No later than December 31, 2019, the Parties shall develop a credit/debit adjustment procedure to return the value of collected Recyclable commodities to Customers in a manner consistent with the following framework: • Future commodity credits shall be based on adjusting the initial $54.07 per ton value to reflect changes in material composition and value over time. • The Mill Trade Journal Pacific Northwest/West Regional market report, high range value, is a reasonable measure for indexing market change of the intitial $54.07 per ton value. If this publication is unavailable, the Parties shall mutually agree on a replacement independent measure of commodity markets. The potential for transitioning to use of market pricing reported in the Contractor's Enspire system will also be considered as part of developing this credit/debit adjustment procedure. • The per-household quantities of recyclables (pounds per household per month) used to calculate the credit/debit, as reported by the Contractor's Enspire system, shall be an acceptable measure of Recyclables quantity, provided that the City may request and receive additional route data (customer count and delivered material quantities per route)to confirm reported quantities. • The composition of processed marketable materials reported by the Contractor's processing facility shall be an acceptable measure of material composition, provided that the City may request up to four sorts of delivered Recyclables each year at the Contractor's expense. The City City of Federal Way 53 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract may arrange for additional sorts, at the City's expense, if the City determines additional samplings are warranted. The Parties may mutually agree to revise the credit/debit procedure, as needed, during the term of the Contract. 5.3.5 New or Changes in Existing Taxes If new municipal, county, regional, or Washington State taxes or fees are imposed, the rates of existing taxes (excluding changes to the rates for federal taxes) or fees are changed, or new road or bridge tolls necessarily affecting the Contractor's operations under this Contract imposed after the Date of Execution of this Contract, and the impact of these changes results in increased or decreased Contractor costs in excess of five thousand dollars ($5,000) in the aggregate annually, the Contractor shall submit a detailed proposal for the adjustment of the rates to reflect any additional costs or savings to the Contractor. The Contractor and City shall enter into good faith negotiations to determine whether compensation adjustments are appropriate for the amount exceeding the five thousand dollar ($5,000) aggregated threshold (in cases in which the threshold applies) and if so, to determine the amount and the method of adjustment. 5.4 Change in Law Except to the extent addressed otherwise in this Contract, changes in federal, state, or local laws or regulations (that do not apply to tax or fee rates) that result in a detrimental change in circumstances or a material hardship for the Contractor in performing this Contract may be the subject of a request by the Contractor for a rate adjustment, subject to review and approval by the City. If the City requires review of financial or other information in conducting its rate review under this provision, then the City may retain a third-party to review such information at the Contractor's expense, taking whatever steps are reasonably feasible, appropriate and lawful to protect the Contractor's documents identified as confidential and proprietary by the Contractor. 6. FAILURE TO PERFORM, REMEDIES,TERMINATION The City expects high levels of Customer service and collection service provision. Performance failures shall be discouraged, to the extent possible, through specific performance fees for certain infractions and through Contract default for more serious lapses in service provision. Section 6.1 details infractions subject to performance fees and Section 6.2 details default provisions and procedures. 6.1 Performance Fees The City reserves the right to make periodic, unscheduled inspection visits to determine the Contractor's compliance with the provisions and requirements of this Contract. In the event that the City's inspection reveals that the Contractor has failed to satisfactorily perform any duties of this Contract, the City shall present an incident report to the Contractor detailing such unsatisfactory performance. The Contractor and the City agree that upon receiving such report, the Contractor shall pay the following dollar amounts, not as a penalty, but as performance fees for failure to satisfactorily perform its duties under this Contract. The City and the Contractor agree that the City's damages would be difficult to prove in City of Federal Way 54 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract any litigation and that these dollar amounts are a reasonable estimate of the damages sustained by the City as a result of the Contractor's failure to satisfactorily perform its duties under this Contract. The performance fees in this Section 6.1 shall not apply to the service impacts of Labor Disruptions, as separate performance fees shall apply under those circumstances, as described in Section 4.1.19. Performance fees shall include: Action or Omission Performance fees 1 Collection before or after the times specified in Section Five hundred dollars ($500) per 4.1.3, except as expressly permitted in writing. incident (each vehicle on each route is a separate incident). 2 Repetition of complaints on a route after City notification, Fifty dollars ($50) per incident, not to including, but not limited to, failure to replace Containers in exceed five hundred dollars ($500) per designated locations, spilling, not closing gates, not vehicle per day. replacing lids, crossing planted areas, or similar violations. 3 Failure to clean-up or collect leaked or spilled materials The cost of cleanup to the City, plus and/or failure to notify the City within three (3) hours of five hundred dollars ($500) per incident. incident. 4 City Observed leakage or spillage from Contractor vehicles Five hundred dollars ($500) per or of vehicle contents. vehicle, per inspection, plus clean-up costs (and potential code fines/penalties). 5 Failure to replace a leaking Container within one (1) One hundred dollars ($100) per business day of notification. incident, and then one hundred dollars ($100) per day that the Container is not replaced. 6 Failure to collect missed materials within one (1) business Fifty dollars ($50) per incident to a day after notification. $50.00 each incidence business day maximum of five hundred dollars after notification ($500) per vehicle per day. 7 Missed collection of a block segment of Single-Family Two hundred fifty dollars ($250) per Residences (excluding collections prevented by inclement block segment if collection is weather, but not excluding collections prevented by performed the following day; one inoperable vehicles). A block segment is defined as one side thousand dollars ($1,000) if not of a street, between cross-streets, not to exceed fifty (50) collected by the following day. houses. 8 Collection as Garbage of non-contaminated Source- One thousand dollars ($1,000) per separated Recyclables, Yard Debris, or Compostables in incident. clearly identified containers, bags, or boxes. 9 Rejection of Garbage, Recyclables, Yard Debris or One hundred dollars ($100) per Compostables without providing documentation to the incident. Customer of the reason for rejection. 10 Failure to deliver Containers within three (3) days of One hundred dollars ($100) per request to Multifamily Complex or Commercial Customers incident. requesting service after the Date of Commencement of Service. City of Federal Way 55 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Action or Omission Performance fees 11 Failure to deliver Garbage, Recyclables or Compostables Twenty-five dollars ($25) per incident. Containers within seven (7) days of request to Single-Family Residence Customers requesting service after the Date of Commencement of Service. 12 Misrepresentation by Contractor in records or reporting. Five thousand dollars ($5,000) per incident. 13 Failure to provide the required monthly and annual reports Five hundred dollars ($500) per day on time. Failure to provide adequate or timely response to past deadline. a request for an Ad Hoc report. 14 Failure to maintain clean, sanitary and properly painted Fifty dollars ($50) per incident, up to Containers. Failure to replace or repair broken lids on maximum of one thousand dollars Containers. ($1,000) per inspection. 15 Failure to maintain contract-compliant vehicles. Fifty dollars ($50) per incident, up to maximum of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per inspection. 16 Failure to meet Customer service answer and on-hold time One hundred dollars ($100) per day. performance requirements specified in Section 4.3.2.4. 17 Failure to meet the service and performance standards Two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) listed in Section 4.3.2 (inclusive of subsections) of this per day until the service standards Contract for a period of two (2) consecutive months. listed in Section 4.3.2 are met for ten (10) consecutive business days. 18 Failure to ensure that all Customers have contract Five thousand dollars ($5,000) per day, compliant Garbage, Recycling, and Compostables plus twenty-five dollars ($25) per Containers on or before the Date of Commencement of Container for each incident occurring Service. after the Date of Commencement of Service. 19 Failure to include City-authorized instructional/promotional Fifty dollars ($50) per incident, with no materials when a new Garbage, Recycling, and/or maximum. Compostables account is established. . 20 Failure to separate collection of materials from Service Area Five thousand dollars ($5,000) per Customers from non-service area customers, unless such route per day. collection is authorized in writing by the City. 21 Inability to reach the Contractor's staff via the emergency Two hundred-fifty dollars ($250) per telephone number. incident. 22 The use of outdated, or non-City-approved stickers, or lack Fifty dollars ($50) per Container. of required stickers on Contractor provided Containers. 23 Failure to have correct rates for all Customer sectors and Two hundred-fifty dollars ($250) per service levels listed on the Contractor's website. day, with no maximum. 24 Failure to maintain, or reduction of, Recyclables or $500 per Complex Compostables service volume below established thresholds for Multi-Family Customers without prior City permission. 25 Failure to close lids on Detachable Containers after Fifty dollars ($50) per incident, up to emptying. maximum of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per inspection. City of Federal Way 56 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Action or Omission Performance fees 26 Failure to investigate, follow-up, and rectify, a "Haul or $250 per Complex Call" event at a Multifamily Complex as described in Section 4.3.5. Nothing in this Section shall be construed as providing an exclusive list of the acts or omissions of the Contractor that shall be considered violations or breaches of the Contract, and the City reserves the right to exercise any and all remedies it may have with respect to these and other violations and breaches. The performance fees schedule set forth here shall not affect the City's ability to terminate this Contract as described in Section 6.2. Performance fees, if assessed during a given month, shall be invoiced in writing by the City to the Contractor. The Contractor shall be required to pay the City the invoiced amount within thirty (30) days of billing. Failure to pay performance fees shall be considered a breach of this Contract, and shall accrue penalty charges of eight percent (8.0%) per month of the amount of any delinquent payments. Any performance fees assessed against the Contractor may be appealed by the Contractor to the City within ten (10) days of being invoiced for assessed performance fees. The Contractor shall be allowed to present evidence as to why the amount of the assessed performance fees should be lessened or eliminated, including the provision of incorrect information provided by a previous contractor for contract failures during the initial transition period. The City's decision shall be final and not subject to appeal. 6.2 Contract Default The Contractor shall be in default of this Contract if it violates any material provision of this Contract. In addition, the Contractor shall be in default of the Contract should any of the following occur, including, but not limited to: 1. The Contractor fails to commence the collection of Garbage, Recyclables, or Compostables, or fails to provide any portion of service under the Contract on the Date of Commencement of Service, or for a period of more than five (5) consecutive days at any time during the term of this Contract, except as provided pursuant to Section 4.1.19; 2. The Contractor fails to obtain and maintain any permit, certification, authorization, or license required by the City, County, or any federal, State, or other regulatory body in order to collect materials under this Contract, or comply with any environmental standards and regulations; 3. The Contractor's noncompliance creates a hazard to public health or safety or the environment; 4. The Contractor causes uncontaminated Recyclables or Compostables to be disposed of in any way, such as in a landfill or incinerated at an incinerator or energy recovery facility, without the prior written permission of the City; 5. The Contractor fails to make any required payment to the City, as specified in this Contract; City of Federal Way 57 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 6. The Contractor is assessed performance fees pursuant to Section 6.1 in excess of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) during any consecutive six(6) month period; or 7. The Contractor fails to resume full service to Customers within twenty-one days following the initiation of a labor disruption pursuant to Section 4.1.19. The City reserves the right to pursue any remedy available at law or in equity for any default by the Contractor. In the event of default, the City shall give the Contractor ten (10) days' prior written notice of its intent to exercise its rights, stating the reasons for such action; however, if an emergency shall arise (including but not limited to a hazard to public health or safety or the environment) that does not allow ten (10) days prior written notice, the City shall promptly notify the Contractor of its intent to exercise its rights. If the Contractor cures the stated reason within the stated period, or initiates efforts satisfactory to the City to remedy the stated reason and the efforts continue in good faith, the City may opt not to exercise its rights for the particular incident. If the Contractor fails to cure the stated reason within the stated period, or does not undertake efforts satisfactory to the City to remedy the stated reason,then the City may at its option terminate this Contract effective immediately. If Contractor abandons or violates any material provision of this Contract, fails to fully and promptly comply with all its obligations, or fails to give any reason satisfactory to the City for noncompliance, and fails to correct the same, the City, after the initial ten (10) days' notice, may then declare the Contractor to be in default of this Contract and notify the Contractor of the termination of this Contract. A copy of said notice shall be sent to the Contractor and surety on the Contractor's performance bond. Upon receipt of such notice, the Contractor agrees that it shall promptly discontinue the services provided under this Contract. The surety of the Contractor's performance bond may, at its option, within ten (10) days from such written notice, assume the services provided under this Contract that the City has ordered discontinued and proceed to perform same, at its sole cost and expense, in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Contract, and all documents incorporated herein. In the event that the surety on the Contractor's performance bond fails to exercise its option within the ten (10) day period, the City may complete the Services provided under this Contract or any part thereof, either through contract with another party or any other means. The City shall be entitled to recover from Contractor and the surety on Contractor's performance bond as damages for all expenses incurred, including reasonable attorneys' fees, together with all such additional sums as may be necessary to complete the services provided under this Contract, together with any further damages sustained or to be sustained by the City. A surety performing under this Contract shall be entitled to payment in accordance with this Contract for Contract services provided by the surety, and shall otherwise be subject to the same rights and obligations with respect to the Contract services furnished by the surety as would be applicable if the Contract services were to be performed by the Contractor. The City's obligation to pay for such Contract services shall be subject to satisfactory performance by the surety as well as to setoffs or recoupments for sums, if any, owed by Contractor to City on account of Contractor's abandonment or default. City of Federal Way 58 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 7. NOTICES Routine communications between the Contractor and the City's contract manager shall be conducted via e-mail unless otherwise required. All notices referencing change of ownership, penalties, rate requests, performance fees, or Contract default shall be in writing and personally served or mailed (postage-prepaid and return receipt requested), addressed to the Parties as follows, or as amended by the City: To the City: Public Works Director City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue S Federal Way, WA 98003 To Contractor: Area Director of Public Sector Solutions Waste Management of Washington, Inc. 720 4th Avenue, Suite 400 Kirkland, WA 98033 8.GENERAL TERMS 8.1 Collection Right Throughout the Contract Term, the Contractor shall be the exclusive provider with which the City shall contract to collect Garbage, Compostables, and Recyclables placed in designated Containers and set out in the regular collection locations within the City Service Area subject to this Contract. When asked by the Contractor, the City shall make a good faith effort to protect the exclusive rights of the Contractor under this Contract; however, The City shall not be obligated to join or instigate litigation to protect the right of the Contractor. The Contractor may independently enforce its rights under this Contract against third party violators, including, but not limited to, seeking injunctive relief, and the City shall use good faith efforts to cooperate in such enforcement actions brought by the Contractor (without obligating the City to join any such litigation, except for as provided in this paragraph). Such efforts may include but not be limited to cease and desist letters, assistance with documenting violations, and other activities as City staff time reasonably allows. This Contract provision shall not apply to Garbage, Recyclables, or Compostables self-hauled by the generator; to Source-separated materials hauled by common or private carriers (including drop-off recycling sites); or to construction/demolition waste hauled by self-haulers or construction or demolition contractors in the normal course of their business. The Contractor shall retain the right and cover all costs to dispose of or process and market the Garbage, and Compostables once those materials are placed in Contractor-provided or City-owned containers. City of Federal Way 59 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract The Contractor shall cover all costs to process Recyclables once those materials are placed in Contractor- provided or City-owned containers. 8.2 Access to Records The Contractor shall maintain in its local office full and complete operations, Customer, financial, and service records that at any reasonable time shall be open for inspection and copying for any reasonable purpose by the City. In addition, the Contractor shall, during the Contract term, and at least seven (7) years thereafter, maintain in an office in King County, reporting records and billing records pertaining to the Contract that are prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, reflecting the Contractor's services provided under this Contract. Those Contractor's accounts shall include, but shall not be limited to, all records, invoices, and payments under the Contract, as adjusted for additional and deleted services provided under this Contract. The City shall be allowed access to these records for audit and review purposes, subject to the same protections of the Contractor's financial or other proprietary information set forth in Section 5.3. The Contractor shall make available copies of certified weight slips for Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables on request within two (2) business days of the request. The weight slips may be requested for any period during the Term of this Contract. 8.3 Insurance The Contractor shall procure and maintain, for the Term of the Contract, insurance that meets or exceeds the coverage set forth below, as determined in the sole reasonable discretion of the City. The cost of such insurance shall be paid by the Contractor. Contractor's maintenance of insurance as required by this Contract shall not be construed to limit the liability of the Contractor to the coverage provided by such insurance, or otherwise limit the City's recourse to any remedy available at law or in equity. 8.3.1 Minimum Scope of Insurance The Contractor shall obtain insurance that meets or exceeds the following of the types described below: 1. Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non-owned, hired, and leased vehicles. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office ("ISO") form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage. The policy shall include the ISO CA 9948 Form (or its equivalent) for transportation of cargo and a MCS 90 Form in the amount specified in the Motor Carrier Act. The policy shall include a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City. The City shall be named as an additional insured under the Contractor's Automobile Liability insurance policy. 2. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 01, or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage and shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors, products-completed operations, personal injury and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract. There shall be no City of Federal Way 60 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract endorsement or modification of the Commercial General Liability insurance for liability arising from explosion, collapse, or underground property damage. The City shall be named as a Primary-Non Contributory Additional Insured under the Contractor's Commercial General Liability insurance policy with respect to the work performed for the City, using ISO additional insured endorsements CG 2010 0704 and CG 2037 0704. 3. Workers' Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws of the State of Washington. 4. Contractor's Pollution Liability insurance coverage covering any occurrence of bodily injury, personal injury, property damage, cleanup costs, and legal defense expenses applying to all work performed under the contract, including that related to transported cargo. The City shall be named as a Primary-Non Contributory Additional Insured under the Contractor's Pollution Liability insurance policy. 8.3.2 Minimum Amounts of Insurance Contractor shall maintain at a minimum the following insurance limits: 1. Automobile Liability insurance with a minimum combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of Ten million dollars ($10,000,000) for each accident. Limits may be achieved by a combination of primary and umbrella policies. 2. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than ten million dollars ($10,000,000) for each occurrence, Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) general aggregate, and a twenty million dollar ($20,000,000) products-completed operations aggregate limit. Limits may be achieved by a combination of primary and umbrella policies. 3. Workers' Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws of the State of Washington. 4. Contractor's Pollution Liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than ten million dollars ($10,000,000) combined single limit for each pollution condition for bodily injury, personal injury, property damage, cleanup costs, and legal defense expense. 8.3.3 Other Insurance Provisions The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions for Automobile Liability, Commercial General Liability, and Contractor's Pollution Liability coverage: 1. The Contractor's insurance coverage shall be the primary insurance with respect to the City, its officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be in excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. The City, its officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be named as Primary-Non Contributory Additional Insured's on the Contractor's Automobile Liability, Commercial General Liability, and Pollution Liability insurance policies, via blanket-form endorsement. City of Federal Way 61 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 2. Coverage shall state that the Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 3. Each insurance policy required by the insurance provisions of this Contract shall provide the required coverage and shall not be canceled except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice (ten (10) days' notice for non-payment of premium) has been given to the City. Such notice shall be sent directly to the City. If any insurance company refuses to provide the required notice, the Contractor or its insurance broker shall notify the City of any cancellation of any insurance immediately on receipt of insurers' notification to that effect. 4. All Deductibles or Self Insured Retentions shall be the full responsibility of the Contractor. 5. Insurance Limits required are minimum limits and do not reduce the Defense, Indemnity, Hold Harmless Liability or any other liabilities of the Contractor. 8.3.4 Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:XII. 8.3.5 Verification of Coverage The Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the blanket-form amendatory endorsements as required herein, including, but not necessarily limited to, the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of the Contractor at least one (1) month before the Date of Commencement of Service of this Contract. 8.3.6 Subcontractors The Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the same insurance requirements as stated herein for the Contractor, including the requirement that the City, its officials, employees, and volunteers be named Primary-Non Contributory Additional Insured's on the Contractor's insurance policy and shall provide applicable endorsements in a form acceptable and approved by the City. 8.4 Performance Bond The Contractor shall provide and maintain at all times a valid Contractor's Performance and Payment Bond or bonds in a form provided by the City in the amount of two million dollars ($2,000,000). The bond(s) shall be issued for a period of not less than one (1) year, and the Contractor shall provide new bond(s) to the City no less than sixty (60) calendar days prior to the expiration of the bond(s) then in effect. The City shall have the right to call the bond(s) in full in the event its renewal is not confirmed prior to five (5) calendar days before its expiration. City of Federal Way 62 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 8.5 Indemnification 8.5.1 Defend, Indemnify and Hold Harmless Contractor shall indemnify, defend, protect, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, representatives, volunteers, and agents, from any and all third party claims or suits, and any damages, costs,judgments, awards or liability resulting from such claims or suits: (a) for injury or death of any person or damage to property to the extent the same is caused by the actual or alleged negligent acts or omissions, or willful misconduct, of Contractor, its agents, servants, representatives, officers, or employees in the performance of this Contract and any rights granted hereunder, or (b) to the extent such claim or demand is caused by Contractor's unlawful release of Hazardous Waste in violation of any Environmental Law in its performance of Services and exercise of any rights granted hereunder. This indemnity under subsection 8.5.1.(1)(b) includes each of the following to the extent the same is caused by Contractor's unlawful release of Hazardous Substances in violation of applicable Environmental Laws: (i) liability for a governmental agency's costs of removal or remedial action for such release by Contractor of Hazardous Waste; (ii) damages to natural resources caused by Contractor's release of Hazardous Waste, including reasonable costs of assessing such damages; (iii) liability for any other person's costs of responding to such release by Contractor of Hazardous Waste; and (iv) liability for any costs of investigation, abatement, correction, cleanup, fines, penalties, or other damages arising under any Environmental Laws that are caused by Contractor's release of Hazardous Waste. Provided, however, such indemnification shall not extend to any claims, demands, liability, loss, cost, damage or expense of any nature whatsoever including all costs and attorneys' fees caused by the sole negligence of the City, its agents, employees, official, officers, contractors or subcontractors. 8.5.2 Process In the event any claim for such damages be presented to or filed with the City, the City shall promptly notify Contractor thereof, and Contractor shall have the right, at its election and at its sole cost and expense, to settle and compromise such claim, provided further, that in the event any suit or action is filed against the City based upon any such claim or demand, the City shall likewise promptly notify Contractor thereof, and Contractor shall have the right, at its election and its sole cost and expense, to settle and compromise such suit or action, or defend the same at its sole cost and expense, by attorneys of its own election. The indemnification obligations set forth herein shall extend to claims which are not reduced to a suit and any claims which may be compromised, with Contractor's written consent, prior to the culmination of any litigation or the institution of any litigation. The City has the right to defend or participate in the defense of any such claim at its own cost and expense, provided that Contractor shall not be liable for such settlement of other compromise unless it has consented thereto in writing. The provisions contained herein have been mutually negotiated by the Parties. Solely to the extent required to enforce the indemnification provisions of this Section 8.5.1, Contractor waives its immunity under Title 51 RCW, Industrial Insurance; provided; however, the foregoing waiver shall not in any way City of Federal Way 63 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract preclude Contractor from raising such immunity as a defense against any claim brought against Contractor by any of its employees. Inspection or acceptance by the City of any Services performed under this Contract shall not be grounds for avoidance of any of these covenants of indemnification, defense, and hold harmless. Said indemnification, defense, and hold harmless obligations shall extend to claims that are not reduced to a suit and any claims which may be compromised, with Contractor's prior written consent, prior to the culmination of any litigation or the institution of any litigation. The provisions of this section shall survive the termination or expiration of this Contract. 8.6 Confidentiality of Information Pursuant to the Washington Public Records Act ("PRA"), Chapter 42.56 RCW, public records, as defined by the PRA, may be subject to disclosure upon request by any person, unless the documents are exempt from public disclosure by a specific provision of law. If the City receives a request for inspection or copying of any such documents, it shall promptly notify the Contractor in writing regarding the public records request. The City will give the Contractor ten (10) business days after such notification within which to obtain a court order prohibiting the release of the documents. The City assumes no contractual obligation to enforce any exemption under the PRA. 8.7 Assignment of Contract 8.7.1 Assignment or Pledge of Money by the Contractor The Contractor shall not assign or pledge any of the money due under this Contract without securing the prior written approval of the surety of the Contractor's performance bond and providing at least thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the City of such assignment or pledge together with a copy of the surety's approval thereof. Such assignment or pledge, however, shall not release the Contractor or its sureties from any obligations or liabilities arising under or because of this Contract. The requirements of this section shall not apply to the grant of a general security interest in the Contractor's assets to secure the Contractor's obligations under any loan or credit facility entered into by the Contractor or the Contractor's lawfully organized corporate affiliates. 8.7.2 Assignment,Subcontracting, Delegation of Duties The Contractor shall not assign or sub-contract any of the services provided under this Contract or delegate any of its duties under this Contract without the prior written approval of the City, which may be granted or withheld in the City's sole discretion. In the event of an assignment, sub-contracting, or delegation of duties, the Contractor shall remain responsible for the full and faithful performance of this Contract and the assignee, subcontractor, or other obligor shall also become responsible to the City for the satisfactory performance of the services to be provided under this Contract. The City may impose conditions of approval on any such assignment, subcontracting, or Change of Control, including but not limited to requiring the delivery by the assignee, City of Federal Way 64 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract subcontractor, or other obligor of its covenant to the City to fully and faithfully complete the services to be provided under this Contract or responsibilities undertaken. In addition, the assignee, subcontractor, or obligor shall sign a separate statement agreeing to abide by all terms and conditions of this Contract. The City may terminate this Contract if the assignee, subcontractor, or obligor does not comply with this clause. For the purposes of this Contract, any change of control of the Contractor shall be considered an assignment subject to the requirements of this section. Nothing herein shall preclude the City from executing a novation, allowing the new ownership to assume the rights and duties of the Contract and releasing the previous ownership of all obligations and liability. 8.7.3 Change of Trade Name In the event the Contractor wishes to change the trade name under which it does business under this Contract, the Contractor shall provide the name, logo, and colors under which it will be doing business in writing to the City at least thirty(30) days prior to the effective date of its change of trade name. Within a reasonable period following a change of trade name by the Contractor, all items, logos, articles, and implements seen by the public shall be changed, including but not limited to letterhead, signs, promotional materials, website pages, billing statements, envelopes, and other items. Vehicles are the only exception; vehicles must be repainted with new trade name, and any new logo or colors, within two (2) years of the effective date of the change of trade name. Failure to comply with the terms of this section shall result in penalties assessed against the Contractor in accordance with Section 6.1. 8.8 Laws to Govern/Venue This Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington both as to interpretation and performance. Venue shall be in Superior Court in the State of Washington for King County. 8.9 Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regulations The Contractor shall comply with all federal, state, and local regulations and ordinances applicable to the work to be done under this Contract. Any violation of the provisions of this section shall be considered a violation of a material provision of this Contract and shall be grounds for cancellation, termination, or suspension of the Contract by the City, and may result in ineligibility for further work for the City. The Contractor agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment or any other persons in the performance of this Contract because of race, religion, creed, color, national origin, marital status, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, or other circumstances as may be defined by federal, state, or local law or ordinance, except for a bona fide occupational qualification. Without limiting the foregoing, Contractor agrees to comply with the provisions of the Affidavit of Equal Opportunity & Title VI Compliance requirements incorporated herein by this reference. The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided by the Contractor setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. City of Federal Way 65 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Conditions of the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act of 1973, and standards and regulations issued under these Acts from time-to-time must be complied with, including ergonomic and repetitive motion requirements. The Contractor must defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from all damages, injuries or losses assessed for the Contractor's failure to comply with the Acts and Standards issued therein. The Contractor is also responsible for meeting all local, state, and federal health and environmental regulations and standards applying to the operation of the collection and processing systems used in the performance of this Contract. The Contractor is specifically directed to observe all weight-related laws and regulations in the performance of these services, including axle bridging and loading requirements. 8.10 Permits and Licenses The Contractor and subcontractors shall secure a City business license and pay all fees and collect and remit all taxes levied by the City. The Contractor shall obtain all permits, certifications, authorizations, and licenses necessary to provide the services required herein prior to the Date of Execution of this Contract at its sole expense. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for all taxes, fees, and charges incurred, including, but not limited to, license fees and all federal, state, regional, county, and local taxes and fees, including income taxes, property taxes, excise taxes, permit fees, operating fees, surcharges of any kind that apply to any and all persons, facilities, property, income, equipment, materials, supplies, or activities related to the Contractor's activities under the Contract, business and occupation taxes, workers' compensation, and unemployment benefits. 8.11 Relationship of Parties The City and Contractor intend that an independent contractor relationship shall be created by this Contract. The implementation of services shall lie solely with the Contractor. No agent, employee, servant, or representative of the Contractor shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant, or representative of the City. 8.12 Contractor's Relationship with Customers The Contractor shall not separately contract with Customers for any services covered under this Contract; however, the Contractor may negotiate separate agreements with Customers for the sole purpose of compactor leasing, payment for recyclables, or other related services only when not included or specified in this Contract, provided that Customers are provided separate invoices for those services and that the Contractor makes it clear to Customers that those services are not provided under this Contract. These separate agreements must be in writing and shall in no way expressly or by application supersede this Contract. The Contractor agrees these separate agreements shall not contain durations any longer than the final date of this Contract's Term. These separate agreements shall not have terms that automatically renew past the expiration of this Contract. These separate agreements must terminate prior to the expiration of this Contract. The Contractor shall provide to the City a detailed list City of Federal Way 66 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract of all such separate agreements with Customers upon the City's request. The City may, at its sole option, regulate similar or identical services in the successor to this contract. 8.13 Bankruptcy It is agreed that if an order for relief with respect to the Contractor is entered in any bankruptcy case, either voluntarily or involuntarily, in which the Contractor is a debtor, then this Contract, at the option of the City, may be terminated effective on or after the day and time the order for relief is entered. 8.14 Right to Renegotiate/Amend The City shall retain the right to renegotiate this Contract or negotiate contract amendments at its discretion or based on policy changes, state statutory changes, or County rule changes, Washington State, or federal regulations regarding issues that materially modify the terms and conditions of the Contract, including but not limited to any modifications to contracting terms or policies as they relate to County disposal services. The City may also renegotiate this Contract should any Washington State, County, or City rate or fee associated with the Contract be held illegal or any increase thereof be rejected by voters. In addition, the Contractor agrees to renegotiate in good faith with the City in the event the City wishes to change disposal locations or add services to the Contract, and to provide full disclosure of existing and proposed costs and operational impacts of any proposed changes. This Contract may be amended, altered, or modified only by a written amendment or addendum executed by authorized representatives of the City and the Contractor. 8.15 Force Majeure Provided that the requirements of this section are met, Contractor shall not be deemed to be in default and shall not be liable for failure to perform under this Contract if Contractor's performance is prevented or delayed by Acts of Nature, including landslides, lightning, forest fires, storms, floods, freezing and earthquakes, terrorism, civil disturbances, acts of the public enemy, wars, blockades, public riots, explosions, governmental restraint or other causes, whether of the kind enumerated or otherwise, that are not reasonably within the control of the Contractor, and are not the result of the willful or negligent act, error or omission of the Contractor; and that could not have been prevented by the Contractor through the exercise of reasonable diligence ("Force Majeure"). The Contractor's obligations under this Contract shall be suspended, but only with respect to the particular component of obligations affected by the Force Majeure and only for the period during which the Force Majeure exists. The following events do not constitute Force Majeure: strikes, other than nationwide strikes or strikes that by virtue of their extent or completeness make the particular goods or services effectively unavailable to the Contractor; work stoppages or other labor disputes or disturbances occurring with respect to any activity performed or to be performed by the Contractor; accidents to machinery, equipment or materials; unavailability of required materials or disposal restrictions; or general economic conditions. If as a result of a Force Majeure event, Contractor is unable wholly or partially to meet its obligations under this Contract,the Contractor shall notify the City by telephone and email, on or promptly after the City of Federal Way 67 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract Force Majeure is first known, followed within seven (7) days by a written description of the event and cause thereof to the extent known; the date the event began, its estimated duration, the estimated time during which the performance of the Contractor's obligations will be delayed; the likely financial impact of the event; and whatever additional information is available concerning the event and its impact on the City and its Customers. The Contractor shall provide prompt written notice of the cessation of the Force Majeure. Whenever such event shall occur, the Contractor, as promptly and as reasonably possible, shall use its best efforts to eliminate the cause, reduce the cost, and resume performance under the Contract. In addition, if as a result of a Force Majeure event, Contractor is unable wholly or partially to meet its obligations under this Contract, the Contractor shall notify all Customers regarding the disruption in collection service in a manner similar to the notification required in the case of inclement weather under Section 4.1.7. 8.16 Severability If any provision of this Contract shall be declared illegal, void, or unenforceable, the other provisions of the Contract shall remain in full force and effect. 8.17 Waiver No waiver of any right or obligation of either party hereto shall be effective unless in writing, specifying such waiver, and executed by the party against whom such waiver is sought to be enforced. A waiver by either party of any of its rights under this Contract on any occasion shall not be a bar to the exercise of the same right on any subsequent occasion or of any other right at any time. 8.18 Incorporation of Contractor's Proposal in Response to City's RFP The Contractor's Proposal, dated April 15, 2019, submitted in response to the City's Request for Proposals, is fully incorporated by this reference, including but not limited to collection vehicle types, customer service staffing and approach, processing abilities and other commitments made in the Contractor's proposal and all associated clarifications and supplemental proposal materials or attachments. In the case of conflict between the Contractor's proposal and this Contract, the provisions of this Contract shall prevail. 8.19 Dispute Resolution The Parties shall attempt to resolve any and all disputes to the mutual satisfaction of both Parties by good faith discussions. Throughout the duration of a dispute, the Contractor shall continue providing all Services included in this Contract. Disputes not resolved in accordance with other provisions of this Contract or through good faith discussions shall be submitted to non-binding mediation before a mediator acceptable to both the City and the Contractor. All costs of mediation, including the City's attorneys' fees and expert witness fees, shall be paid for by the Contractor. Neither party may initiate or commence legal proceedings prior to completion of the non-binding mediation. City of Federal Way 68 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract 8.20 Entirety This Contract and the exhibits affixed hereto and herein incorporated by reference represent the entire agreement between the City and the Contractor with respect to the services to be provided under this Contract. No prior written or oral statement or proposal shall alter any term or provision of this Contract. WITNESS THE EXECUTION HEREOF on the day and year first herein above written. WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WASHINGTON, INC. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY By By (Print) Jim Ferrell, Mayor Approved as to Form: By J. Ryan Call, City Attorney City of Federal Way 69 July,2019 Comprehensive Garbage,Recyclables,and Compostables Collection Contract EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A: Service Area EXHIBIT B: Early Start of Service Support EXHIBIT C: Recyclables List EXHIBIT D: Service Support Resource Levels EXHIBIT E: Contractor Rates EXHIBIT F: Rate Modification Example City of Federal Way 1 July,2019 Exhibits EXHIBIT A Service Area Citya Map Date:June 2019 City City Service Area Federal edera Way, Wa9y8 OQ IPI 253 835 7000 Way I W I www.cityoffedera lway corn 1 Mile A Des N Kent Moines S 272ND ST Puget Svu"t.1 V) >- S 288TH ST �x a� dumas Bay ` Centre Q � y► W 3 H T rforming Art A &" vent Center SIN 320TH ST U„ S.320TH ST a O� LU Federal ; ,. i --4 way Q Community Auburn r Cerster NORTH SHORE PARKWAY i'} N City • tf1 SW CAMPUS Hall S 336TII S7 Tacoma S 348TH SW 356TH ST �2 '� y2 N- ,d Legend Milton City Limits cf'+ • • • King County Boundary Edgewood Fife This map is intended for use CITY of as a graphical representation. 'Ilk Federal Way The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. City of Federal Way 1 July,2019 Service Area EXHIBIT B Early Start of Service Support • New Customer Service Staffing and Phone Queue: "Customer Service,Just for You" As of September 1, 2019, a Federal Way Customer Service Team (Four dedicated staff:two supervisors plus two floor leads)will oversee Federal Way customer calls. Designated staff will travel to Federal Way at least twice each year to meet with City staff and have ride alongs with drivers to see services delivered to customers first hand. The Federal Way Customer Service Team will have exceptional knowledge and know-how regarding implementing the intricacies of this Contract and the "Customer Service,Just for You" initiative. Contractor will transition to Federal Way's new Dedicated Call Queue (accessed via the City's original garbage service phone number: 253-833-3333). Contractor will maintain this phone line so it will continue to be fully operational as a current alternative to the contractor's aggregated toll-free service phone number. As of September 1, 2019, calls using this original phone number will be answered via a Dedicated Call Queue. Contractor will track and provide weekly reports to the City of the metrics related to the Dedicated Call Que including speed to answer, hold times, and call abandonment data specifically originating from the Federal Way service area via the original phone number. The Dedicated Call Queue will also feature Federal Way-focused greeting and phone tree options that will also become operational as of September 1, 2019. • Extending Customer Service Center Hours on all Saturdays As of September 1, 2019, Contractor's Federal Way Customer Service Team will field calls from customers Monday-Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. • Education and Outreach Coordinator—ongoing support for Federal Way As of September 1, 2019, Contractor's Public Education and Outreach Coordinator assigned to the Federal Way service area will be based at the South Sound district.This staff person will dedicate no less than 40% FTE in annual staff hours to developing, managing and providing education and outreach programs in Federal Way. City of Federal Way 1 July,2019 Early Start to Support Services m ti 0 (N T 3 X L Lr) L U C O � C � C C v N Q O Q O 4-1 L C UQ 1 lEo U Ou X Q . - 4J O O L U1 L p N Q L C N U Lf1 v� V) In O .x m C C m o 4-10 -0t `o t`a • X LO ro Ln Ln Ln C O C N N m U1 m O ca 'O 0 0 Q X m 4-�+ +� Ln 4' �O O C f6 N C 41 C L O O L U -C L =Ln f6 lE Q co O v 0 O O Z to d L J C J J C LfB w _ O O a) _p pN C a C 2 O M >. O J • O uj c6 O v U A N } U V Q U O C azo m L 'Q '— U1 u ah O '— U m �a U C L N U O U 4' 3 4+ O u cy 2 C O co C C L N a aA N p � ago U1 ' O OA M 4- C OA f6 U U >- w C U N U L JJ (10 C (p U .knF • _ _ f6 U C M O J > 11 —C N E fro 6 J Q E O L U +J L O Q U O O U N N -O M 4O M O E U +J C U N C C C 4, ,C U1 aA U U1 U1 X O fB O U C N C N C L C) oU U c Q >- u Q c c x N +' cLa 3 �a — f6 o E v Eo E O O M 'o ado ca a Q Q U W L d w U cn U - d V) Q ro U V) U Q • X X X X X X X X X C c6 U1 dA 0 C 4-1 41 -0 (6 Q O Vi U1 N O U O 7 N C O O O O -0O " N O > F U .+ U C 1 C O r- -a c6 C CE Q M � C n C L Q Q O (U c6 U c6 c6 N • O u I O L O V v� Q E OA lEU -p Ya..' — C — O C O -LZ a O— = N N a O aA O L O m x O L C O `- O Q p EIy O U C .0 I N N — U N m X 41 O � = Q C U - M u' Q u O a N L p I _ — bb I -p U Q � f6 _ p Q C Q U1 ,� O GJ N f6 {A 'O O O 'O• u _ c0 co O I c n U _ O _ a00 U v� L N u 0 L U LL D N p m 0 M to > m N Q .Q V u l7 a E m a m N � F- ° > > v EXHIBIT D Service Support Resource Level The table on the following pages clarifies outreach programs proposed by the Contractor in their response to the City's Request for Proposal. In general, the City will support Contractor-proposed outreach programs that are intended to be impactful and scaled to be beneficial for City ratepayers. Individual outreach programs will be implemented after appropriate outcomes and measures are agreed to by both parties, including a written commitment of resources to be provided by the Contractor. The Contractor shall track the implemented outreach programs and report program outcomes in each year's annual report. City of Federal Way 1 July 2019 Service Support Resource Level Waste Management Service Support Resource Levels For Federal Way Collection Service Contract Program/ Project Details Metric Goal COLLATERAL: PROMOTION AND EDUCATION New Customer One welcome packet comprised of materials from the annual #customers Inform and Welcome comprehensive service packet per each new residential, per LOB educate Packets multifamily and commercial customer for term of Contract. customers Customers may choose electronic or mailed copy. Hard copy mailed welcome packets require a minimum 5-days from new customer starts. Comprehensive See Section 4.3.5 of Contract. Once per year and at start of #customers Inform and Service Packet Contract for all customers. Once per year for residential non- educate subscribers and multifamily residences. customers Bill Inserts One insert per quarter for each residential, multifamily and #customers Inform and commercial customers. educate customers Foodcycler One e-newsletter per quarter to residential and multifamily #customers Inform and E- Newsletter customers where Contractor has a valid email address on educate record. Foodcycler E-newsletter will be repurposed from customers WM's Foodcycler Program with King County; E-newsletter will not be city-specific nor amended to contain additional or different information. Oops Tags As needed in support of contamination program and protocol #incidents Reduce for term of Contract. Double-sided notice with contamination per tag type contamination feedback on one side and guidelines on the other. One tag for each material type: recycling, compost, and garbage. Transcreated Collection guidelines available as needed for garbage, # materials Inform and Materials recycling and food/yard waste, upon request of customer for distributed in educate term of Contract. See Contractor's Proposal for languages each language customers available. Multilingual Bilingual decals (Spanish, Korean and Russian) available upon #decals Inform and Dumpster request from property manager for term of Contract. Standard distributed in educate Decals size of decal is 14 x 11 for containers ranging from 1-8 yards. each language customers Distributed by Public Education team and printed as needed. for each material type Postcards for See "Know before you throw" program # postcards Reduce Multifamily distributed contamination Contamination Campaign City of Federal Way 2 July, 2019 Support Service Levels Program/ Details Metric Goal Project Reusable Tote 20,000 tote bags produced by Contractor prior to Reduce Bags for commencement of Contract, for multifamily customers for contamination Recyclables term of Contract. Tote bags will be distributed as needed by and reduce Public Education & Outreach and will vary based on location bagged and property manager. material in recycle container PROGRAMS AND CONTAMINATION REDUCTION: NO LESS THAN 16 HOURS PER WEEK OF STAFF TIME Recycling Up to 4 per year upon request; facilitation of tour only #tours given Inform and Facility Tours at (transportation to/from facility not included). Requests may and number educate CRC be for either CRC or JMK with limits on tour size for JMK of people on facility and signed waivers. Tours are not available outside tour business hours at this time. Classroom Up to 4 workshops and 4 lunch room audits per year upon #workshops Educate youth Workshops request. Available for K-12 1h grade with age appropriate and lunch and reduce activities including quiz games, sorting games, songs, stories, room audits contamination and worksheets. Promoted through WM social media. conducted Community At least 4 events per year; events will be selected in #events Inform and Events-WM coordination with the city. WM will provide 100 reusable conducted educate Educational shopping bags per event for booth visitors. and estimated customers Booths number of attendees to educational booth WM Recycle Each summer WM will deploy summer interns towards detailed Increase Corps contractual obligations as needed and in collaboration with report of diversion the city. WM will provide a minimum of two (2) interns each outreach and/or reduce summer to conduct various activities like multifamily door-to- conducted contamination door outreach and events as already contemplated deliverables within this chart. WM Think WM to host one 6-hour event per year for multifamily and #attendees, Diversion Green residential customers only. Residents drop off items at type of items Recycling and convenient collection location designated by Contractor. and # Reuse Accepted items could include: foam, textiles, shredded paper collected, Collection and electronics. Promotion through WM social media outlets. measured by Events count or weight as appropriate City of Federal Way 3 July, 2019 Support Service Levels Program/ Details Metric Goal Project Multifamily On- Public Education & Outreach will provide site visits, lobby # properties Increase Site Technical events and presentations to at least 20 properties per year. reached and diversion Assistance Properties selected through requests or determined by the property and/or reduce contamination program and minimum recycling volume diversion rate contamination threshold. Door-to-door education only occurs during the or summer with WM Recycle Corp interns. The 3C program is contamination part of our education process and is ongoing in reducing reduction as contamination. appropriate Multifamily Up to 3,000 units per year. # units Increase Door-to-Door reached and diversion Outreach property and/or reduce diversion rate contamination or contamination reduction as appropriate Compost Up to 10 properties per year upon request;technical # properties Increase Technical assistance only, which includes a multifamily toolkit (a reached and diversion Assistance for brochure that explains the benefits of composting, process for property Multifamily setting up a program and resident FAQ). This outreach is in diversion rate Properties addition to the multifamily door-to-door outreach as or described above. contamination reduction as appropriate Multifamily Weekly phone call or email (Contractor's discretion)for all # Reduce Contamination customers marked as contaminated. Public Education & contamination contamination Plan Outreach will provide a monthly report as to outreach efforts incidents and results. Commercial Monthly phone call or email (Contractor's discretion) for all # Reduce Contamination customers marked as contaminated. Public Education & contamination contamination Plan Outreach will provide monthly report as to outreach efforts incidents and results. Residential Quarterly phone call or email (Contractor's discretion) all # Reduce Contamination customers with 3 or more contamination instances. contamination contamination Plan incidents Commercial 1 (or 2 small) commercial customer(s) per year wins (random # Reduce Recycling All selection based upon entries submitted by WM— property contamination contamination Stars Incentive goes from contaminated to consistently clean will qualify the incidents property for entry) a summer celebration including pizza party, games and prizes for staff. City of Federal Way 4 July, 2019 Support Service Levels Program/ Details Metric Goal Project Multifamily 1 multifamily property(or 2 small, less than 200 units), per # Reduce Recycling All year wins (random selection based upon entries submitted by contamination contamination Stars Incentive WM— property goes from contaminated to consistently clean incidents will qualify the property for entry) a summer celebration including pizza party, games and prizes for families. Residential 5 customers per year wins (random selection based upon # Reduce Recycling All entries submitted by WM—resident goes from contaminated contamination contamination Stars Incentive to consistently clean will qualify the resident for entry) one incidents month of free service. Clean Cart Annually, WM will provide public education to 105 customers # Reduce Program (7 groups of 15 customers each) identified by drivers as those contamination contamination needing assistance to remove contamination from recycling incidents container. Outreach provided at WM discretion in order to work with customers. Progress moving customers from contaminated to clean reported to the city each month. SF Residential 2 per year; to assess contamination for purposes of Reduce Recycle Tip educational outreach &collateral materials. WM will contamination Floor Audits distribute results to the city after collecting the data. Know Before WM is offering Federal Way a new program for at least 3 # Reduce You Throw properties per year. The goal is to achieve contamination contamination contamination Multifamily reduction by identifying specific contaminates to a property to incidents Contamination assist in developing education to address that contaminate to Campaigns that property. WM outreach staff will audit recycling at multifamily properties to identify the number one barrier to clean recycling. WM will create a single-message campaign around the issue(s)found and develop creative and informative emails or postcards, depending on city and property manager preferences. City of Federal Way 5 July, 2019 Support Service Levels Program/ Details Metric Goal Project MEDIA Website See Section 4.3.2.6 of Contract. Inform and The website is updated on an ongoing basis as information educate changes. In the event of a service interruption, the website customers, weatherboard page is updated throughout the day to provide promote the latest information. programs and services The website contains .pdf versions of key documents, including collection guidelines, sample oops tags, city recycling review newsletter, and we have the capability to provide additional information in .pdf formats as needed. Website updates can be posted same-day, and typically within hours, depending on the nature of the changes. We are now examining options for creating and maintaining a dedicated "weatherboard" page for Federal Way. Our plan for the website is to continuously improve the customer experience by making the website as user-friendly as possible and providing the appropriate information as customer needs change. RORR RecycleOftenRecycle Right.com as an educational resource for Inform and customers, as available educate customers Social Media The target for posting information for Federal Way customers Inform and is at least three times per month for all platforms combined. educate Facebook page for term of Contract. The WM Facebook page customers, specifically designed for Federal Way customers is promote https://www.facebook.com/pg/ThinkGreenFederalWay/posts programs and /?ref=page internal. services The WM Twitter page for Federal Way and other WM customers in Western Washington is https://twitter.com/WMPugetSound. We use Federal Way-specific tags to ensure visibility by local media, local organizations, the chamber and the city. Any City or Mayor tags will be reviewed by City before posting. We proactively encourage customers to follow us on the Federal Way Facebook by including invitations on the website (http://wmnorthwest.com/federalway/index.html) and on customers' postcards and information packet materials. City of Federal Way 6 July, 2019 Support Service Levels Program/ Details Metric Goal Project MISCELLANEOUS Specialized lids Comply with Section 4.3.5 of Contract. # Reduce with slots for contamination contamination detachable incidents container lids Specific WM will assist multifamily complexes with coming into # Reduce Procedures for compliance with recycling volume thresholds or contamination contamination contamination Multifamily thresholds. The initial recycling volume thresholds are incidents and increase Complexes established as 0.12 cubic yards per week per unit diversion (approximately 96 gallons per month) and a target of 5%of less contamination by volume. Coming into compliance may include door-to-door education, training of residents and/or property management staff, signage and posted information, addressing space and capacity constraints. The Contractor shall also coordinate and work cooperatively with City staff and/or consultants hired to conduct outreach and education, and otherwise provide technical assistance. City of Federal Way 7 July, 2019 Support Service Levels Exhibit E: Contractor Rates Service Pounds Final Level Per Disposal Collection Revised Admin Fee B&O Tax Revised Service Level Count Unit Fee Fee Rates 3.2% 1.5% Rates Monthly One 32 gallon Garbage Cart inc1591 current microcan cust 612 20.23 $ 1.42 S 9.08 $ 10.50 $ 0.33 $ $ 10.83 Weekly One 20-gallon Garbage Cart 3,477 9.25 $ 2.82 S 13.00 $ 15.82 $ 0.50 $ $ 16.32 Residential 1 35-gallon Garbage Cart 7,931 16.18 $ 4.94 S 15.81 $ 20.75 $ 0.66 $ $ 21.41 Curbside 1 64-gallon Garbage Cart 5,039 32.36 $ 9.87 S 20.47 $ 30.34 $ 0.97 $ 0.01 $ 31.32 Service 1 96-gallon Garbage Cart 1,317 48.54 $ 14.81 $ 29.90 $ 44.71 $ 1.43 $ 0.02 $ 46.16 Total Garbage Extras 32 gallon equivalent) 1,919 16.18 $ 1.14 $ 4.86 $ 6.00 $ 0.19 $ $ 6.19 Customers: Miscellaneous Fees: 18,376 RecyclingOnl no garbage service $ 11.69 $ 0.37 $ $ 12.06 Compostables Only no garbage service $ 12.88 $ 0.41 $ - $ 13.29 Subscription rate for one 32-gallon Compostables Cart 848 $ 10.53 $ 0.33 $ $ 10.86 Subscription rate for one 64-gallon Cornpostables Cart 1,343 $ 11.04 $ 0.35 $ $ 11.39 Subscription rate for one 96-gallon Compostables Cart 9,622 $ 11.59 $ 0.37 $ $ 11.96 Extra Co ostables 32 gallon bag/bundle/cam $ 3.00 $ 0.09 $ $ 3.09 Second 96-Gallon Compostables Cart rental only) $ 1.50 $ 0.04 $ $ 1.54 Additional 96-Gallon Compostables Cart(for ongoing excess above base 96-gallon service) 285 $ 6.00 $ 0.19 $ $ 6.19 Return Tri,per line of business 33 $ 15.00 $ 0.48 $ $ 15.48 Roll-out Charge,per 25 It,per cart 61 $ 3.00 $ 0.09 $ $ 3.09 Drive-in Charge,per month,per line of business 11 $ 6.00 $ 0.19 $ $ 6.19 Dormant Account(charged past four weeks suspension)per month $ 7.50 $ 0.24 $ $ 7.74 Overwei UOvers.e container(Per /u $ 3.00 $ 0.09 $ Redelivery of one or more containers 11 $ 15.00 $ 0.48 $ $ 15.48 Cart Cleaning(per cart per cleaning) 1 $ 10.00 $ 0.32 $ $ 10.32 On-Call Non-CFC Containing Large Appliance("white goods")per item 1 $ 20.00 $ 0.64 $ $ 20.64 Bulky Refri erators/Freuers/Air Conditioners per item 1 $ 30.00 $ 0.96 $ 0.01 $ 30.97 Waste Sofas,Chairs,per item 2 75.00 $ 5.28 $ 14.72 $ 20.00 $ 0.64 $ $ 20.64 Collection Mattresses,Boxsprings,per item 2 100.00 $ 7.04 $ 12.96 $ 20.00 $ 0.64 $ $ 20.64 Weekly One 20-gallon Garbage Cart(23) 27 9.25 $ 2.82 $ 17.21 $ 20.03 $ 0.64 $ $ 20.67 Commercial 1 32/35-gallon Garbage Cart(294) 399 16.18 $ 4.94 $ 17.70 $ 22.64 $ 0.72 $ 0.01 $ 23.37 /M[F Can and 1 60/64-gallon Garbage Cart(6) 60 32.36 $ 9.87 $ 23.91 $ 33.78 $ 1.08 $ 0.01 $ 34.87 Cart 1 90/96-gallon Garbage Cart(4) 34 48.54 $ 14.81 $ 30.09 $ 44.90 $ 1.43 $ 0.02 $ 46.35 Extras(32-gallon equivalent)(3) 16.18 $ 1.14 $ 4.86 $ 6.00 $ 0.19 $ $ 6.19 Emptying Litter&Recyclables receptacles in public areas,per unit,per VOTE: collection(including lining) tbd 16.18 $ 1.14 $ 2.86 $ 4.00 $ 0.12 $ $ 4.12 Column C is Compostables Service: total MF Weeld 35-gal Cart Yard Debris/Foodwaste service !i!! 10.00 $ 11.57 $ 0.37 $ $ 11.94 and comm Weeld 64-at Cart Yard Debris/Foodwaste service $ 12.19 $ 0.39 $ $ 12.58 containers. Weekly 96-gal Cart Yard Debris/Foodwaste service(29) $ 12.88 $ 0.41 $ $ 13.29 Number in Ancilla Fees: cohmm B in Return Trip,per line of business $ 15.00 $ 0.48 $ $ 15.48 (red)is the Roll-out Charge,per 25 ft.unit,per cart,per pickup,per week $ 1.50 $ 0.04 $ $ 1.54 portion that Redelivery of containers $ 10.00 $ 0.32 $ $ 10.32 are MF C ostable (per Cart,per pick-up) $ 4.00 $ 0.12 $ $ 4.12 Cart Cleaning/Swap(per Cart) $ $ 0.32 $ $ 10.32 Weekly 1 Cubic Yard Container 343.59 $ 104.82 $ 305.90 $ 410.72 $ 13.14 $ 0.19 $ 424.05 Commercial/ 1.5 Cubic Yard Container 515.39 $ 157.24 $ 400.40 $ 557.64 $ 17.84 $ 0.26 $ 575.74 ME Detachable 2 Cubic Yard Container 687.18 $ 209.65 $ 494.90 $ 704.55 $ 22.54 $ 0.33 $ 727.42 Container 3 Cubic Yard Container 1 1,030.77 $ 314.47 $ 683.90 $ 998.37 1$ 31.94 $ 0.47 $ 1,030.78 (compacted) 4 Cubic Yard Contains 1 1,374.36 $ 419.30 $ 872.90 $ 1,292.20 $ 41.35 $ 0.62 $ 1,334.17 6 Cubic Yard Contains 3 2,061.54 $ 628.95 $ 1,260.88 $ 1,889.83 1$ 60.47 $ 0.90 $ 1,951.20 City of Federal Way 1 July,2019 Contractor Rates Service Pounds Final Level Per Disposal Collection Revised Admin Fee B&O Tax Revised Service Level Count Unit Fee Fee Rates 3.2% 1.5% Rates Co-rd.] 1 Cubic Yard,1 piclmp/week(1) 91 114.53 $ 34.94 $ 78.47 $ 113.41 $ 3.62 $ 0.05 $ 117.08 Detachable 1 Cubic Yard,2 ickn s/week 1 114.53 $ 69.88 $ 156.94 $ 226.82 $ 7.25 $ 0.10 $ 234.17 Container 1 Cubic Yard,3 pickups/week 2 114.53 $ 104.82 $ 235.41 $ 340.23 $ 10.88 $ 0.16 $ 351.27 (loose) 1 Cubic Yard,4 pickups/week 114.53 $ 139.76 $ 313.88 $ 453.64 $ 14.51 $ 0.21 $ 468.36 1 Cubic Yard,5 pickups/week 114.53 $ 174.70 $ 392.35 $ 567.05 $ 18.14 $ 0.27 $ 585.46 1.5 Cubic Yard,1 pickup/week(2) 24 171.80 $ 52.41 $ 99.53 $ 151.94 $ 4.86 $ 0.07 $ 156.87 1.5 Cubic Yard,2 pickups/week(1) 1 171.80 $ 104.82 $ 199.06 $ 303.88 $ 9.72 $ 0.14 $ 313.74 1.5 Cubic Yard,3 pickups/week 171.80 $ 157.23 $ 298.59 $ 455.82 $ 14.58 $ 0.21 $ 470.61 1.5 Cubic Yard,4 pickups/week 171.80 $ 209.64 $ 398.12 $ 607.76 $ 19.44 $ 0.29 $ 627.49 1.5 Cubic Yard,5 pickups/week 171.80 $ 262.05 $ 497.65 $ 759.70 $ 24.31 $ 0.36 $ 784.37 2 Cubic Yard,1 piclmps/week(6) 101 229.06 $ 69.88 $ 120.71 $ 190.59 $ 6.09 $ 0.09 $ 196.77 2 Cubic Yard,2 pickups/week(13) 21 229.06 $ 139.76 $ 241.42 $ 381.18 $ 12.19 $ 0.18 $ 393.55 2 Cubic Yard,3 piclmps/week(3) 3 229.06 $ 209.64 $ 362.13 $ 571.77 $ 18.29 $ 0.27 $ 590.33 2 Cubic Yard,4 pickups/week 229.06 $ 279.52 $ 482.84 $ 762.36 $ 24.39 $ 0.36 $ 787.11 2 Cubic Yard,5 pickups/week 2 229.06 $ 349.40 $ 603.55 $ 952.95 $ 30.49 $ 0.45 $ 983.89 3 Cubic Yard,1 piclmp/week(20) 85 343.59 $ 104.82 $ 163.59 $ 268.41 $ 8.58 $ 0.12 $ 277.11 3 Cubic Yard,2 pickups/week(40) 58 343.59 $ 209.64 $ 327.18 $ 536.82 $ 17.17 $ 0.25 $ 554.24 3 Cubic Yard,3 pickups/week(2) 11 343.59 $ 314.46 $ 490.77 $ 805.23 $ 25.76 $ 0.38 $ 831.37 3 Cubic Yard,4 pickups/week 343.59 $ 419.28 $ 654.36 $ 1,073.64 $ 34.35 $ 0.51 $ 1,108.50 3 Cubic Yard,5 pickups/week 1 343.59 $ 524.10 $ 817.95 $ 1,342.05 $ 42.94 $ 0.64 $ 1,385.63 4 Cubic Yard,1 pickup/week(39) 125 458.12 $ 139.77 $ 198.69 $ 338.46 $ 10.83 $ 0.16 $ 349.45 4 Cubic Yard,2 pickups/week(47) 89 458.12 $ 279.54 $ 397.38 $ 676.92 $ 21.66 $ 0.32 $ 698.90 4 Cubic Yard,3 pickups/week(6) 43 458.12 $ 419.31 $ 596.07 $ 1,015.38 $ 32.49 $ 0.48 $ 1,048.35 4 Cubic Yard,4 pickups/week(6) 6 458.12 $ 559.08 $ 794.76 $ 1,353.84 $ 43.32 $ 0.64 $ 1,397.80 4 Cubic Yard,5 pickups/week(1) 6 458.12 $ 698.85 $ 993.45 $ 1,692.30 $ 54.15 $ 0.81 $ 1,747.26 6 Cubic Yard,1 pickup/week(19) 69 687.18 $ 209.65 $ 273.88 $ 483.53 $ 15.47 $ 0.23 $ 499.23 6 Cubic Yard,2 pickups/week(22) 61 687.18 $ 419.30 $ 547.76 $ 967.06 $ 30.94 $ 0.46 $ 998.46 6 Cubic Yard,3 pickups/week(5) 21 687.18 $ 628.95 $ 821.64 $ 1,450.59 $ 46.41 $ 0.69 $ 1,497.69 6 Cubic Yard,4 pickups/week 2 687.18 $ 838.60 $ 1,095.52 $ 1,934.12 $ 61.89 $ 0.92 $ 1,996.93 6 Cubic Yard,5 iclm s/week 1 687.18 $ 1,048.25 $ 1,369.40 $ 2,417.65 $ 77.36 $ 1.16 $ 2,496.17 8 Cubic Yard,1 piclmp/week(16) 60 916.24 $ 279.53 $ 331.81 $ 611.34 $ 19.56 $ 0.29 $ 631.19 8 Cubic Yard,2 pickups/week(12) 49 916.24 $ 559.06 $ 663.62 $ 1,222.68 $ 39.12 $ 0.58 $ 1,262.38 8 Cubic Yard,3 pickups/week(4) 22 916.24 $ 838.59 $ 995.43 $ 1,834.02 $ 58.68 $ 0.88 $ 1,893.58 8 Cubic Yard,4 iclm s/week 2 916.24 $ 1,118.12 $ 1,327.24 $ 2,445.36 $ 78.25 $ 1.17 $ 2,524.78 8 Cubic Yard,5 iclm s/week 3 916.24 $ 1,397.65 $ 1,659.05 $ 3,056.70 $ 97.81 $ 1.46 $ 3,155.97 Extra loose cubic yard in container,per pickup(83) 125 1 114.53 $ 8.06 $ 6.94 $ 15.00 $ 0.48 $ $ 15.48 Extra loose cubic yard onground,per ic" 114.53 $ 8.06 $ 11.94 $ 20.00 $ 0.64 $ $ 20.64 Detachable Container Ancilla Fees(per occurrence): Stand-by Time(per minute $ 1.60 $ 0.05 $ $ 1.65 Container Cleauin (per yard of container size,including transport) $ 10.00 $ 0.32 $ Rodefivery of Containers $ 30.00 $ 0.96 $ 0.01 Return Trip per line of business(1) 3 City of Federal Way 2 July,2019 Contractor Rates Hata Hata Service Level(based on ick ups) Count Char a Admin Fee B&O Tax charge Commercial Non-compacted 12 cubic d Dro-box 0 boxes $ 198.41 $ 6.34 $ 0.09 $ 204.84 MIF Drop-box Non-compacted 15 cubic yard Drop-box(0 boxes) $ 198.41 $ 6.34 $ 0.09 $ 204.84 Collection Non-compacted 20 cubic yard Drop-box(9 boxes)(1) 35 $ 198.41 $ 6.34 $ 0.09 $ 204.84 Non-compacted 25 cubic yard Drop-box(1 box)(1) 3 $ 198.41 $ 6.34 $ 0.09 $ 204.84 Non-compacted 30 cubic yard Drop-box(1 boxes)(1) 10 $ 198.41 $ 6.34 $ 0.09 $ 204.84 Non-compacted 40 cubic yard Drop-box(4 boxes)(1) 8 $ 198.41 $ 6.34 Compacted 10 cubic yard Drop-box 1 boxes 0 $ 240.82 $ 7.70 $ 0.11 $ 248.63 Compacted 15 cubic yard Drop-box 7 boxes 10 $ 240.82 $ 7.70 $ 0.11 $ 248.63 Compacted 20 cubic yard Drop-box 3 boxes 3 $ 240.82 $ 7.70 $ 0.11 $ 248.63 Compacted 25 cubic yard Drop-box(4 boxes) 15 $ 240.82 $ 7.70 $ 0.11 $ 248.63 Compacted 30 cubic yard Drop-box 16 boxes 23 $ 240.82 $ 7.70 $ 0.11 $ 248.63 Compacted 35 cubic yard Drop-box 3 boxes 10 $ 240.82 $ 7.70 $ 0.11 $ 248.63 Compacted 40 cubic yard Drop-box(10 boxes) 9 $ 240.82 $ 7.70 $ 0.11 $ 248.63 Count Daily Rent Admin Fee B&O Tax Daily Rent Non-compacted 12 cubic yard Drop-box 0 boxes $ 1.88 $ 0.06 $ $ 1.94 Non-compacted 15 cubic yard Drop-box(0 boxes) $ 2.24 $ 0.07 $ $ 2.31 Non-compacted 20 cubic yard Drop-box(9 boxes)(1) $ 2.67 $ 0.08 $ $ 2.75 Non-compacted 25 cubic yard Drop-box(1 box)(1) $ 3.08 $ 0.09 $ $ 3.17 Non-compacted 30 cubic yard Drop-box(1 boxes)(1) $ 3.47 $ 0.11 $ $ 3.58 Non-compacted 40 cubic yard Drop-box(4 boxes)(1) $ 3.84 $ 0.12 $ $ 3.96 Drop box Ancillary Fees Count Per Event Admin Fee B&O Tax Per Event Return Trip $ 30.00 $ 0.96 $ 0.01 $ 30.97 Stand-by Time(per minute $ 1.60 $ 0.05 $ $ 1.65 Container cleaning(per yard of container size $ 10.00 $ 0.32 $ $ 10.32 Solid Lid Smcl ar a(per month of rental $ 20.00 $ 0.64 $ $ 20.64 Drop-box directed to other facility(per mile,one-way) j $ 3.75 $ 0.12 $ $ 3.87 Service Pounds Level Per Disposal Collection Hata Hata Service Level Count Unit Fee Fee Charge Admin Fee B&O Tax Charge Temporary 2 Yazd detachable Container 2 229.06 $ 16.13 $ 34.82 $ 50.95 $ 1.63 $ 0.02 $ 52.60 MF/Com'l 4 Yazd detachable Container 2 458.12 $ 32.26 $ 57.32 $ 89.58 $ 2.86 $ 0.04 $ 92.48 Collection 6 Yazd detachable Container 2 687.18 $ 48.38 $ 79.01 $ 127.39 $ 4.07 $ 0.06 $ 131.52 Hauling 8 Yazd detachable Container 2 916.24 S 64.51 $ 95.72 $ 160.23 $ 5.12 $ 0.07 $ 165.42 Non-compacted 10 cubic yard Drop-box $ 234.55 $ 7.50 $ 0.11 $ 242.16 Non-compacted 20 cubic yard Drop-box 4 boxes 11 $ 234.55 $ 7.50 $ 0.11 $ 242.16 Non-compacted 25 cubic yard Drop-box $ 234.55 $ 7.50 $ 0.11 $ 242.16 Non-compacted 30 cubic yard Drop-box(16 boxes)(11 Nff) 15 $ 234.55 $ 7.50 $ 0.11 $ 242.16 Non-compacted 40 cubic yard Drop-box(5 boxes)(3 Nff) 11 $ 234.55 $ 7.50 $ 0.11 $ 242.16 Service Level Count Daily Real Admin Fee B&O Tax Daily Real Temporary 2 Yazd detachable container 2 $ 1.30 $ 0.04 $ $ 1.34 Collection 4 Yazd detachable container 2 $ 1.45 $ 0.04 $ $ 1.49 Container 6 Yazd detachable container 2 $ 1.80 $ 0.05 $ $ 1.85 Rental 8 Yazd detachable container 2 ;r.,, $ 2.00 $ 0.06 $ - $ 2.06 and Delivery Non-compacted 10 cubic yard Drop-box 0 $ 2.35 $ 0.07 $ $ 2.42 Non-compacted 20 cubic yard Drop-box 11 $ 3.34 $ 0.10 $ $ 3.44 Non-compacted 30 cubic yard Drop-box 0 $ 4.34 $ 0.13 $ $ 4.47 Non-compacted 40 cubic yard Drop-box 15 $ 4.80 $ 0.15 $ $ 4.95 Count Delivery Admin Fee B&O Tax Delivery Delivery Fee(ail sizes) 25 S 91.37 $ 2.92 $ 0.04 $ 94.33 Event Count Per Day Admin Fee B&O Tax Per Day Services Delivery,provision,collection of a set of 3 carts(G,R&C) S 25.00 $ 0.80 $ 0.01 $ 25.81 Service Count Per Door Admin Fee B&O Tax Per Door Hourly Rear/Side-load packer+driver $ 145.28 $ 4.64 $ 0.06 $ 149.98 Rates Front-load packer+driver $ 145.28 $ 4.64 $ 0.06 $ 149.98 Drop-box Truck+driver $ 145.28 11 $ 4.64 1 $ 0.06 $ 149.98 Additional Labor(per person) $ 78.95 $ 2.52 $ 0.03 $ 81.50 Count Rebate Commodity Initial Year Recyclable Commodity Value,per MF yd $ 0.58 Credit Initial Year Recyclable Commodity Value,per Corot yd $ 0.15 Initial Year Recyclable Commodity Value,per res'1 customer $ 1.00 City of Federal Way 3 July,2019 Contractor Rates EXHIBIT F Fee Modification Examples The collection and disposal components of the Customer charges listed in Exhibit B will be adjusted separately, as appropriate. The collection component of Customer charges will be adjusted annually, pursuant to this Section and as described below. The disposal component of the Customer charges listed in Exhibit B will be adjusted only if the City receives notification from the County of a pending disposal fee adjustment, and will not become effective until the new disposal charges become effective and are actually charged to the Contractor. Formulas for both collection and disposal rate adjustments are provided as follows: Collection Component Adjustment The sum of the collection and Administrative Fee components listed in Exhibit B will be increased or decreased by the amount of the CPI change: NCC= PCC x [1+ nCPI—oCPI oCPI Where NCC = The new collection and Administrative Fee components, adjusted for excise tax on the Administrative Fee, of the customer rate for a particular service level; and PCC = The previous collection and Administrative Fee components, adjusted for excise tax on the Administrative Fee, of the Customer rate for a particular service level; and nCPI = The most recent June CPI value; and oCPI = The CPI value used for the previous rate adjustment or, in the case of the first contract adjustment, the CPI value reported at the end of June 2019. Disposal Component Adjustment In the case of a disposal fee modification at County disposal facilities, the disposal component of each service level will be adjusted as follows: Step 1: A = ODC x NTF OTF Step 2: NDC=A+[(A —ODC)x CETR] City of Federal Way 1 July 2019 Fee Modification Examples Where NDC = The new disposal charge component of the customer rate for a particular service level; and NTF = The new disposal fee, dollars per ton; and ODC = The old disposal charge component of the customer rate for a particular service level; OTF = The old disposal fee, dollars per ton; and A = Pre-excise tax adjusted disposal component; and CETR = Current excise tax rate(the current State excise tax rate; 0.015 used for this example). For example, using an initial one 35-gallon cart rate of $21.41 per month: if the previous CPI is 143.2, the new CPI is 144.3 and the disposal fee will increase from $130 to $140 per ton starting on January 1, 2021, the old disposal component is $4.94, the old collection component is $16.47 (including Administrative Fee), and the State Excise Tax rate is 0.015, the January 2021 Customer charge for one 35-gallon cart per week Residential Curbside service would be: (144.3-143.2) New Collection Component=$16.47 x [1+-------------------] _$16.60 (143.2) New Disposal Component Step A calculation (as on previous page): [$4.94 x(140/130)] _$5.35 Step B calculation (as on previous page): $5.32+ [(5.32-4.94)x 0.015] _ $5.33 Thus, the new Customer charge for one 35-gallon cart per week Residential Curbside service will be the $16.60 collection component plus the$5.33 disposal component, equaling$21.93. Administrative Fee Adjustment The Contractor's rates shown in Exhibit E include an embedded Administrative Fee, which may be adjusted from time to time, pursuant to Section 5.2. The initial contract rates have incorporated an Administrative Fee corresponding to a 3.2% fee on gross receipts from those Customers, as follows (1 yard, 1 pickup per week as example): Collection Fee ($78.47) + Disposal Fee ($34.94) +Administrative Fee ($3.62) + Excise Tax at 1.5% on Administrative Fee ($0.05) =Customer rate of$117.08. City of Federal Way 2 July 2019 Fee Modification Examples In the event the City Administrative Fee is adjusted, the Administrative Fee portion of the Contractor's Customer rates shall be adjusted in the manner shown in Exhibit E, which retains the Contractor's underlying compensation and ensures that the Contractor remains whole when the Administrative Fee percent is changed over time. City of Federal Way 3 July 2019 Fee Modification Examples COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16, 2019 ITEM#: _ CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: SAGHALIE SOCCER FIELD SYNTHETIC TURF REPLACEMENT POLICY QUESTION: Should the City enter into an agreement with FieldTurf® Corporation to replace the synthetic turf and install an e-layer cushion pad under the Saghalie soccer field? COMMITTEE: PRHSPS Committee MEETING DATE: July 9,2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY:Stephen Ikerd,Deputy Director DEPT: Parks Attachments: Saghalie synthetic turf replacement memo Options Considered: 1. Authorize the Mayor to sign an agreement with FieldTurf to replace synthetic turf and install an e-layer cushion pad under the Saghalie soccer field, for a total not to exceed $783,914.57 (Total includes; project cost, 10%contingency and tax) 2. Do not approve an agreement with FieldTurf for the Saghalie synthetic turf replacement and give staff direction. MAYOR'S RECOMMEND TION: Option 1 MAYOR APPROVAL: 7 ,1 / 7 VN DIRECTOR APPROVAL: —1/r Af, Cam tte Council Committee COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: "I move to forward option 1 to the July 16, 2019 consent agenda for approval". r- /4:oinmittee Chair Committe Member jCnl�ittee PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize the Mayor to sign an agreement with FieldTurffor the replacement of synthetic turf and install an e-layer cushion pad under the Saghalie soccer field,for a total not to exceed $783,914.5 7 BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED IST reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—08/12/2010 RESOLUTION# cibv or - Federal Way Parks and Facilities Division Date: July 27, 2019 To: PRHSPS Council Committee Via: Mayor Jim Ferrell John Hutton, Parks Director From: Stephen Ikerd, Deputy Parks Director Subject: Saghalie synthetic turf replacement Financial Impacts: The City of Federal Way has sufficient CIP reserve funds, in addition to a $250,000 KC youth athletic grant and a FW soccer association donation of $50,000 to cover the replacement cost of synthetic turf at Saghalie Park. Background: The synthetic turf installed 2008 on the Saghalie soccer field has reached its useful life and is in need of replacement this year. Staff researched synthetic turf products currently on the market to replace the soccer field carpet and recommend using FieldTurf — 2" "Core" turf along with installing what the industry calls an a-layer cushion pad under it for longer safety cushioning capacity and to help with overall durability. None of our fields have this added cushion pad feature so this is a safety upgrade that will last for many turf replacements well into the future. Most synthetic turf comes with an 8 year warranty but the "Core" model comes with a 10 year warranty. Historically we have been able to get a couple extra years past a warranty. In the past we use a cooperative purchasing group that works with government agencies that pre-bids different products to insure a set discounted price is available to the end user. FieldTurf is on the list of several purchasing co-operatives and has given us the best price through Keystone Purchasing Network (KPN) of which the City is a member. Project scope: Remove and dispose old synthetic turf, check subgrade and drainage and make repairs as needed. Install an a-layer cushion pad, install 2" "Core" synthetic turf using a more secure stitching method vs glue only by other companies, install infill materials into the turf fibers, install associated lines and g-max test the entire field to insure proper safety standards meet or exceed national requirements. Price includes; 10% contingency, KPN discounts, performance and payment bonds, and WSST tax. Project cost: FieldTurf estimate; $712,649.91 including tax. Adding 10% contingency increases the total request not to exceed to $783,914.57. Unforeseen cost could come from drainage repairs if a need is found after removing the old turf, otherwise prices are set per estimate. Funding Source: $250,000.00— King County Youth Sports Grant 50,000.00— Federal Way Soccer Association donation. $483.914.57 —City has $600,000 in reserve CIP funds. This amount includes contingency. $783,914.57—Grand total not to exceed Note: Federal Way School District through an Interlocal Joint Use 'Agreement is responsible for half of the replacement cost. The highest potential contingency amount is $483,914.57 shown above on the City line. The full range of half of the cost is $206,324.95 — 241,957.28 depending on whether any contingency is needed for unforeseen cost? District has indicated they are in a budget crisis for at least 2 more years and on a different budget cycle than the City and don't know if they can commit any funds until the end of July 2019. Parks suggested if they cannot come up with sufficient funds this year that a possible alternate to consider may be to commit to fully replace Sacajawea synthetic turf in a few years when it is due for replacement. District intends to let us know by the end of July 2019 whether they can eventually participate in the Saghalie cost or look ahead to Sacajawea soccer field full replacement cost? The Saghalie soccer field is failing and needs to be replaced, so while we have a KC Grant, a FW Soccer Association donation and sufficient Parks CIP reserves funds for this purpose, staff recommends proceeding with this replacement now. Request: Staff requests that Council approves the awarding of a PO to FieldTurf Corporation to replace the synthetic turf on the Saghalie soccer field in an amount not to exceed $783,914.57. COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: �� CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:FEDERAL WAY SOCCER ASSOCIATION DONATION POLICY QUESTION: Should the City of Federal Way accept a$50,000 donation from the Federal Way Soccer Association for use on the Saghalie soccer field turf replacement? COMMITTEE:Parks, Recreation, Human Services & Public Safety MEETING DATE: July 9,2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Shen Ikerd, Deputy Director DEPT: Parks Attachment: Federal Way Soccer Association donation letter. Background: Staff applied for a KC Athletic Sports Grant and in June Council accepted the grant award of $250,000 to be applied to the replacement of the synthetic turf at Saghalie Park. Federal Way Soccer Association also committed to donate $50,000 to be used for the replacement of this failing synthetic turf on the soccer field. r Options Considered: Option 1 -Accept a donation of$50,000 from the Federal Way Soccer Association for the Saghalie synthetic turf replacement. Option 2-Do not accept a donation of$50,000 for turf replacement and provide staff direction. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 MAYOR APPROVAL: / 'f -7 tJ15 DIRECTOR APPROVAL: 7111- 1k Comas tee Coup iI Initial/Date Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:I move to forward option I to the July 16, 2019 consent agenda for approval. Committee Chair Committeb Member C.om I ee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of accepting a Federal Way Soccer Association's donation in the amount of$50,000.00. (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—12/2017 RESOLUTION# Stephen Ikerd Parks Deputy Director 33325 8th Ave S. Federal Way;WA 98003 Mr. Ikerd, I am writing you to formalize Federal Way Soccer Associations commitment to the Saghalie Soccer Field Turf resurfacing. FWSA has a long history of serving the community by providing soccer opportunities to the youth of Federal Way. We appreciate the partnership and cooperation with the City of Federal Way, the Mayor' Office, Parks Department, Parks Commission, City Maintenance staff and City Council. Over the years this partnership has allowed our organization to impact thousands of young lives with the opportunity to participate in the game of soccer. We would like to plead a contribution of$50,000 for this project from our organization. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me or George Pfeiffer, Respectfully Submitted, by Ji-shwa '� k(.•�• f=-jO,1),ache S71]F;:;FWi' nm, I •a�"'' �• `.. Oil-�zae ...ars. _.. ,,•1=,Iushua Ch[;a.am .... Gale 2019 N 27 16:2a1,W-GTCO' Joshua A. Cheatham President Federal Way Soccer Association joshua.cheatham@rocketmail.com 206-261-6863 PO BOX 27281 Federal Way,WA 98093 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: 61 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: JAIL SERVICES CONTRACT—KENT CITY JAIL POLICY QUESTION: Should the Federal Way Police Department enter into a contract with the Kent City Jail for jail services at the cost of approximately$350,000 annually? COMMITTEE: Parks, Recreation,Human Services, and Public Safety MEETING DATE: July 9, 2019 Counci I Committee—(PRHS&PSC) CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Kurt Schwan, Professional Standards Commander DEPT: Police Attachments: 1. Staff Report 2. Kent City Jail Contract Options Considered: 1. Approve the execution of this contract 2. Do not approve this amendment MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: 1. Approve the execution of this contract MAYOR APPROVAL: 6 k6[I_t_ C 1p 26 ' DIRECTOR APPROVAL: Comm tce Council ansa;x.•.it Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward the Jail Services Contract with the Kent City Jail to the July 16, 2019 Co cil consent agenda for approval. anlnittee Chair Comliiii e Member Come tee Melllbe PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of the Jail Services Contract with the Kent City Jail and authorize the Mayor to sign said agreement". (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—12/2017 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 9, 2019 TO: City Council Members VIA: Jim Ferrell, Mayor FROM: Andy J. Hwang, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Jail Services Contract—Kent City Jail Financial Impacts: By withdrawing from SCORE and utilizing other jail facilities, the projected annual jail services expenditures would be $4,330,300. This would be an annual savings over SCORE/KC Jail contracts of$2,085,672. The Kent City Jail is one of the jail services providers to be utilized in order achieve the above stated savings. The projected annual cost to utilize the Kent City Jail would be $350,000. Background Information: In 2009, SCORE was established to serve the seven Owner Cities,with a goal of providing consolidated correctional services at a lower total cost to the participating Owner Cities. In the case of Federal Way,there has been a significant jail cost increase in the seven years we have been an Owner City,creating a financial burden that is unsustainable. In 2012,Federal Way's total jail budget was $2,305,280, a 17% M&O obligation (based on 60 ADP). In 2018,the SCORE jail budget swelled to $6,293,163, a 30.23%M&O obligation(80 ADP). (The 2018 total jail budget is $6,415,972, which includes other jail expenses outside of SCORE.) The steady incremental increase for the past seven years,totaling 20 more ADP, has increased our SCORE budget by$3,987,883—this reflects an increase of 173%since the inception of our participation. The SCORE Financial Alternatives Study Subcommittee was created to research financial alternatives for Owner Cities. At this time,no feasible alternative option exists or has been presented for Owner Cities to remedy the unsustainable financial obligation for the City of Federal Way. The following are all of the projected annual on-going jail services expenditures utilizing jail facilities other than SCORE; Rev.7/18 Average Daily Maintenance (+booking fees) at 70 ADP $2,395,300 SCORE debt service $935,000 Infirmary/Mental Health Detention $275,000 Medical $150,000 Work Release/EHM/Probation $100,000 Four (4) FTEs (salary & benefits) $460,000 M&O for jail transport vehicle $15,000 Total annual projected Jail Operations Expenditure $4,330,300 Current 2018 SCORE/KC jail budget $6,415,972 Annual savings over current SCORE/KC Jail contracts $2,085,672 On September 4, 2018, Federal Way City Council unanimously passed a resolution authorizing the withdrawal from the SCORE Inter-local Agreement. The Kent City Jail has been identified as one of the jail services providers to be utilized in order to achieve the above stated savings. The projected annual cost to utilize the Kent City Jail would be $350,000. Rev.7/18 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY AND THE CITY OF KENT FOR JAIL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the City of Federal Way ("Federal Way"), a municipal corporation in the State of Washington and the City of Kent ("Kent"), a municipal corporation in the state of Washington, collectively the ("Parties"). WHEREAS, this Agreement is made under the authority of the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Ch. 39.34 RCW; and WHEREAS, pursuant to state law, Federal Way is responsible for the incarceration of suspects and defendants held pending resolution of misdemeanor cases and upon conviction for misdemeanor crimes committed in Federal Way("Federal Way Inmates"); and WHEREAS, Federal Way does not own a facility suitable for incarcerating Federal Way Inmates; and WHEREAS, Kent, which is located in King County, operates a municipal corrections facility known as the Kent Corrections Facility("KCF"); and WHEREAS, Kent is willing to provide for the housing of Federal Way Inmates pursuant to this Agreement; and WHERAS, the Federal Way Municipal Court has reviewed sections of this agreement that impose duties upon the court; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions set forth below, it is mutually agreed by and between Federal Way and Kent as follows: 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for the incarceration of Federal Way Inmates at the KCF; to establish the services that Kent will provide pursuant to the incarceration of Federal Way Inmates as well as the responsibilities of Federal Way; and to set forth the fees to be paid by Federal Way for such services. 2. JAIL SERVICES PROVIDED. The KCF shall provide the jail services to Federal Way as provided in this Agreement. 2.1 Federal Way Inmate—Defined. A Federal Way Inmate is defined as a person 18 years of age or older who is arrested for, charged with, or convicted of a misdemeanor offense committed in the city limits of Federal Way or who has an active Federal Way warrant, and who is booked into or otherwise entered into the KCF. Prior to booking a female inmate, Federal Way will contact the KCF to ensure there is adequate available space for female inmates. In the event a person is booked into the KCF and the person has a Federal Way warrant, that person shall be considered a Federal Way Inmate regardless of which agency books the inmate, and Jail Interlocal Agreement between City of Kent and Federal Way Page 1 of 9 regardless of whether the inmate has a warrant from any other agency. Such inmate shall remain a Federal Way Inmate until the warrant is quashed by a court or the defendant is released or removed from custody on the charge. In the event an inmate has both a Kent warrant and a Federal Way warrant, Federal Way shall not be responsible for the booking fee. 2.2 Guaranteed Space. The KCF shall provide Federal Way with space for five Federal Way Inmates for each day that this Agreement is effective. These five spaces shall be referred to as "Guaranteed Space." This Guaranteed Space shall be reserved only for Federal Way Inmates as that term is defined in this Agreement. Federal Way shall pay for the Guaranteed Space whether or not the Guaranteed Space is occupied by Federal Way Inmates. Guaranteed Space shall include bed space on the hard-side of the jail, or participation in KCF programs (as described in Section 2.6) other than electronic home detention("EHD"). 2.3 Additional Space. The KCF may have additional jail space, beyond the reserved Guaranteed Space, available depending on its jail population, which fluctuates on an hourly basis. Jail space made available beyond the Guaranteed Space shall be referred to as "Additional Space." In the event Federal Way brings a Federal Way Inmate to the KCF for processing when the Guaranteed Space is occupied, it will be presumed that Federal Way is requesting Additional Space, and Additional Space will be made available at the discretion of the KCF. In the event Additional Space is made available, the Additional Space shall be paid for at the rate provided for in Section 3.2 of this Agreement. In the event Additional Space is not available, Federal Way shall be solely responsible for making other arrangements for the incarceration of the Federal Way Inmate. Additional Space shall be considered occupied if a Federal Way Inmate occupies bed space on the hard-side of the jail, or participates in KCF programs other than EHD. Federal Way shall endeavor to notify the KCF when it intends to engage in law enforcement action that will likely result in a mass booking (i.e. the booking of three or more people) and the need for more than normal Additional Space. 2.4 Notification of Number of Inmates. KCF shall provide Federal Way, via facsimile or other electronic transmission sent Monday through Friday, excluding holidays, with a list of Federal Way inmates. This list shall include a list of all Federal Way inmates booked and/or released for the 24-hour period. 2.5 Terms, Conditions and Policies. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, Federal Way Inmates shall be subject to the same terms and conditions of confinement as Kent inmates, shall be subject to the same policies and procedures applicable to Kent inmates, and shall be provided the same services as Kent inmates. By way of example and not by way of limitation, this shall include policies and procedures regarding good time credit, the disciplinary process, the standards of release, and medical temporary releases. 2.6 Programs — Incarceration Alternatives. Subject to KCF policies and procedures, Federal Way Inmates may have the same opportunities as Kent inmates to participate in alternative programs such as but not limited to EHD, work release, and work crew. With the exception of EHD, a Federal Way Inmate participating in a program shall count as a Federal Way Inmate occupying Guaranteed Space, or if there are more than five Federal Way Inmates, Jail Interlocal Agreement between City of Kent and Federal Way Page 2 of 9 Additional Space. The KCF may charge Federal Way Inmates a fee to participate in certain programs, such as EHD or work release, consistent with the rates charged to Kent inmates. 2.7 Medical Program. Federal Way Inmates shall receive the same type and level of medical care, and medications under the same circumstances, as Kent inmates. Medical care and medications that are provided at the KCF by Occupational Health Services ("OHS") staff on contract with the KCF shall be included in the rates charged for Guaranteed Space and Additional Space; provided, that in the event it is determined that an inmate is in need of medication that exceeds a cost of$1,000.00 per month to provide, the KCF shall place Federal Way on notice of the need, and after 72-hours of receiving such notice, Federal Way shall be responsible for covering the costs of the medications that accrue after the 72-hour notice period. 2.7.1 Medical Care Outside of ItCF - Federal WavResponsible. Any medical care deemed, at the discretion of KCF or OHS staff, necessary for the proper care of a Federal Way Inmate, but which is provided to a Federal Way Inmate at a location other than KCF, or by medical staff other than OHS staff on contract with KCF, shall be an additional cost to Federal Way, and Federal Way shall be responsible for payment of such medical care costs. Federal Way shall also be responsible for any costs of transport of inmates by way of ambulance service to an outside medical facility. Invoices from outside medical providers or ambulance service providers shall be forwarded to Federal Way for payment by Federal Way directly to the provider. KCF will, upon request, assist Federal Way in the effort to reduce medical costs billed by outside providers. 2.7.2 Medical Temporary Release. Federal Way acknowledges that some Federal Way Inmates may have extraordinary medical care needs, and that the KCF, as a municipal facility, is not in the best position to provide medical care for these Federal Way Inmates. As a condition of this Agreement, the Federal Way Municipal Court shall be required to adopt the standards of release relating to medical temporary releases adopted by the Kent Municipal Court as now adopted or later amended. In the event KCF staff determines that a Federal Way Inmate's medical needs should be addressed by a facility other than the KCF, KCF staff may issue a medical temporary release that is consistent with the standards of release for the KCF as approved and adopted by the Federal Way Municipal Court, and shall provide for a follow-up court date. In addition, Federal Way shall have the authority to issue a medical temporary release. 2.7.3 Booking of Ill or Injured Inmates or Inmates in Mental Crisis. It is recognized that the KCF provides medical services to inmates treatable on site, and that significant medical needs are treated off-site. Federal Way shall not book into the KCF Federal Way Inmates with medical emergencies or major medical needs, including inmates in severe mental health crisis. 2.7.4 KCF Medical Transportation and MedicalSupervision Costs. Reimbursement for all actual costs incurred by Kent when transporting Federal Way Inmates to medical facilities and for supervising Federal Way Inmates during medical appointments or procedures (for example, inmates who are at a high risk of reoffending and ineligible for a medical temporary release pursuant to the adopted standards of release) are Federal Way's sole Jail Interlocal Agreement between City of Kent and Federal Way Page 3 of 9 responsibility and shall not be included in the payment for Guaranteed Space. At each billing cycle, Kent will invoice Federal Way for the cost of any Federal Way inmate medical transportation costs, including supervision costs, incurred during a billing period. The costs shall be charged at a rate of $50 per hour. Time shall be charged in 15 minute increments rounded to the nearest increment. [Example: An inmate is transported to a medical procedure, is supervised during the procedure, and is then transported back to the KCF. The officer spends two hours and 18 minutes performing this task. Federal Way would be billed $112.50 for the task]. This cost will be charged whether a KCF officer or Kent police officer performs the transport and supervision. 2.8 Transporting Federal Way Inmates to Court or Cather Jail facilities. Federal Way shall arrange for the transport of Federal Way Inmates to all court appearances. Kent shall not be responsible for transporting Federal Way Inmates to court. Transportation for court services shall be the sole responsibility of Federal Way. Federal Way may contract with other agencies for jail services. Federal Way and Kent shall establish an operational policy regarding the transport of Federal Way Inmates from or to the KCF and from or to other correctional facilities. The operational policies shall establish a regular and efficient schedule for the transportation of Federal Way Inmates to reduce the frequency of transports. The operational policy shall also aim to avoid the transport of pretrial detainees from the KCF to a jail facility in eastern Washington in the event a court date that will result in the return of the Federal Way Inmate to the KCF is pending. 2.9 Video Court Services. KCF may make available the KCF library and video link between the KCF and the Federal Way Municipal Court in order to facilitate video hearings by the Federal Way Court for Federal Way Inmates incarcerated at the KCF. The scheduling of video link usage shall be mutually agreed upon by Kent and Federal Way; provided, the Kent Municipal Court shall have priority when establishing a time for video hearings. 2.10 Confidential Meeting Space for Federal Way Inmates and Defense Counsel. KCF shall make space available for Federal Way Inmates to meet confidentially with defense counsel in order to provide inmates with the effective assistance of counsel. 2.11 Release of Federal Way Inmates. KCF shall release Federal Way Inmates pursuant to a signed order from the Federal Way Municipal Court judge, commissioner or pro tem. KCF shall accept the Federal Way Judge's orders sent via facsimile or other form of electronic transmission to the KCF. Federal Way Inmates shall be released to a Federal Way police or transport officer at a prescheduled time as agreed to by the Parties, and the Federal Way police or transport officer shall release Federal Way inmates within the city limits of Federal Way. Federal Way inmates shall not be released by Federal Way within the city limits of Kent unless the inmate is a resident of Kent. In the event an inmate is released on the weekend, or as a result of an emergency that results in the unavailability of a Federal Way police or transport officer, inmates may be transported by a Kent police officer to Federal Way or provided with a bus voucher; provided, Jail Interlocal Agreement between City of Kent and Federal Way Page 4 of 9 Federal Way shall be responsible for the actual costs of the Kent police transport or bus voucher which shall be invoiced in accordance with this Agreement. As a condition of this Agreement, the Federal Way Municipal Court shall adopt standards of release applicable to Federal Way Inmates that are to be followed by KCF staff. The standards of release adopted by the Federal Way Municipal Court shall be the same as the standards of release adopted by the Kent Municipal Court. 2.12 Use of Electronic Home Monitoring Contractor for Federal Way Defendants not Incarcerated ui the .Kff Perinittcd. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to limit the authority of a Federal Way judge from ordering or permitting a Federal Way defendant that is not in the custody or control of KCF to use a provider of electronic home detention services other than the service provided by the KCF as a condition of a sentence or pre-trial release. However, if a Federal Way inmate is sentenced to a term of confinement in the KCF, that inmate shall be considered a Federal Way Inmate and shall be subject to the rules, policies and procedures of the KCF. KCF, at its sole discretion and subject to the policies and procedures of the KCF, will determine whether an inmate will serve his or her time on the KCF's EHD program. The Federal Way judge shall not have the authority to designate a particular EHD program for any Federal Way inmate once the Federal Way inmate is in the custody or control of the KCF. 3. FEES. In consideration of the services enumerated in this Agreement, the Parties agree to the fees and charges below. In order to provide clarity to the Parties, Exhibit A has been attached to describe the below application of inmate fees for Guaranteed Space and Additional Space. 3.1 Guaranteed Space — Fee. Federal Way shall pay for Guaranteed Space, as that phrase is described elsewhere in this Agreement, at a rate of$750.00 per day ($273,750.00 per year). This fixed fee for guaranteed space shall be paid regardless of whether the Guaranteed Space is occupied or not. 3.2 Additional Space - Fee. The daily rate for Additional Space for each additional Federal Way Inmate who occupies the KCF over and above the Guaranteed Space shall be $20.00 per day for inmates on EHD, and $180.00 per day for occupied beds or participation in programs other than EHD. A full day shall be charged for any Federal Way Inmate who occupies Additional Space for any period of a day. For example, and not by limitation, a Federal Way Inmate who is occupying Additional Space and is booked into the KCF on Monday at 9:00 p.m., and released the following Tuesday at 1:00 pm shall be deemed to have spent two days in the KCF, and the cost of the daily rate shall be 2 x $180.00, for a total of$360.00. 3.3 Booking - Fee. Except as provided for in Section 2.1, Kent shall invoice Federal Way for booking fees in the amount of$35.00 per booking. For the purposes of this section, "booking" shall mean each instance in which a Federal Way Inmate is booked into the jail after a period in which he or she was not subject to confinement at the KCF or participating in a KCF jail program including KCF operated EHD. Federal Way Inmates who are transported for a Jail Interlocal Agreement between City of Kent and Federal Way Page 5 of 9 court hearing and then transported back to the KCF at the conclusion of the hearing will not be considered booked when readmitted to the KCF. Inmates who return to the KCF on their own free will after a temporary release or medical release shall not be considered booked when readmitted to the KCF. 3.4 Additional Costs. Kent shall invoice Federal Way for all other costs as set forth in this Agreement, including: a. The costs of medications in accordance with Section 2.7 of this Agreement. b. The costs to Kent of providing transportation and supervision services to offsite medical facilities in accordance with Section 2.7.1 of this Agreement. c. The cost of bus vouchers and the costs for Kent officers to transport Federal Way Inmates to Federal Way upon release in accordance with Section 2.11 of this Agreement. Bills of medical services provided by medical providers outside of the KCF as well as ambulance transport services to outside medical providers shall be forwarded to Federal Way for payment by Federal Way 3.5 Annual Cost Inflator. On January 1, 2020, and on January 1 of each year thereafter that this Agreement is in effect, including any year in which this Agreement is extended, the fees set forth in Sections 3.1-3.2 shall be subject to an annual inflator in an amount equal to the Seattle- Tacoma-Bellevue CPI-W for June of the preceding year•,provided, in the event the Seattle-Tacoma- Bellevue CPI-W for June of the preceding year is zero or a negative number, the fees set forth in Sections 3.1-3.2 shall not be reduced. 4. BILLING AND PAYMENT. Federal Way shall pay Kent the fees and costs described in this Agreement upon receipt of an invoice delivered no less than quarterly. The invoice shall be sent to Federal Way at the address provided for notices. The bill shall identify the Federal Way Inmates who occupied the KCF during the quarter by name, as well as the number of days each Federal Way Inmate occupied jail space. The bill shall also provide the booking date and inmate name for any booking fee charged, and shall describe all other fees or costs being invoiced by the date, description, and basis for the fee or cost. Federal Way shall pay to Kent the amounts invoiced within 30 days of receipt of such bill. The failure of Kent to invoice Federal Way for fees or costs shall not relieve Federal Way of the responsibility for paying any fees or costs as required by this Agreement. The Parties may agree in writing to an alternate method or timing for invoicing and payment. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE - TERMINATION. The initial term of this Agreement shall start on December 23, 2019, and shall remain in effect through December 31, 2022 This Agreement may be automatically renewed by the Parties for successive terms by written Agreement of the Mayor of Federal Way and the Chief Administrative Officer of Kent. Agreements for successive terms shall be agreed to by the Parties by October 1 of the year in which the current term. 5.1. Early Tenninalioii" without Breacb. Should either party desire to terminate this Jail Interlocal Agreement between City of Kent and Federal Way Page 6 of 9 Agreement absent a breach, a notice of termination shall be provided in writing to the other party no less than 180 days prior to the effective date of the termination. 5.2. Early Termination for Breach. In the event a party is in material breach of this Agreement, the non-breaching party shall provide the breaching party with written notice of breach, along with an explanation of the basis for the breach and the method of curing the breach. If the breaching party fails to cure the breach, this Agreement may be terminated by written notice issued by the non-breaching party. In the event Federal Way is the party in breach, Federal Way shall be subject to an early termination penalty of $15,670.75 for each month remaining in the duration of the Agreement. 6. INDEMNIFICATION. 6.1. Kent shall indemnify and hold harmless Federal Way and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any act or omission of Kent, its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of the performance of this contract. In the event that any suit based upon such a claim, action, loss, or damage is brought against Federal Way, Kent shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense, provided that Federal Way retains the right to participate in said suit; and if final judgment be rendered against Federal Way, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against Federal Way and Kent and their respective officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, the Parties shall apportion any damages between them according to the proportionate amount of fault as set forth in the judgment. 6.2. Federal Way shall indemnify and hold harmless Kent and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any act or omission of Federal Way, its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of the performance of this contract. In the event that any suit based upon such a claim, action, loss, or damage is brought against the Kent, Federal Way shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that Kent retains the right to participate in said suit; and if final judgment be rendered against Kent, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against Kent and Federal Way and their respective officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, the Parties shall apportion any damages between them according to the proportionate amount of fault as set forth in the judgment. 6.3 The provisions of this Section shall survive termination of this Agreement. 7. MISCELLANEOUS. 7.1 Financing. There shall be no financing of any joint or cooperative undertaking pursuant to this Agreement, except as set forth herein. There shall be no budget maintained for any joint or cooperative undertaking pursuant to this Agreement. Jail Interlocal Agreement between City of Kent and Federal Way Page 7 of 9 7.2 Property. This Agreement does not provide for the acquisition, holding or disposal of real or personal property. 7.3 Joint Administrative Board. No separate legal or administrative entity is created by this Agreement. To the extent necessary, this Agreement shall be jointly administered by the Police Chief for Federal Way or his/her designee, and the Police Chief for Kent or his/her designee, who together, shall constitute the board contemplated in RCW 39.34.030(4)(x). 7.4 Failure to File or Publish. The failure of either Party to file or publish this Agreement in accordance with RCW 39.34.040 shall not affect the enforceability of this Agreement as between the Parties. 7.5 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the Parties hereto and no other Agreements, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement, shall be deemed to exist or bind any of the Parties hereto. Either party may request amendments to this Agreement. Proposed amendments which are mutually agreed upon shall be incorporated by written amendment hereto. 7.6 Doctrine of Contra Proferentem Not Applicable. This agreement has been prepared by both parties with advice of legal counsel and the legal doctrine of Contra Proferentem shall not be used against either party to resolve any dispute about the meaning of a provision. 7.7 Notices. Notices shall be sent to the following addresses: Mayor and Chief Administrative Officer and Police Chief Police Chief City of Federal Way City of Kent 333258 th Avenue South 220 Fourth Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 Kent, WA 98032 7.8 Attornev's Fees. Each party shall be responsible for its own attorney and legal fees in any legal proceeding brought for the enforcement of this Agreement, or because of a dispute, breach, default, or misrepresentation in connection with any of the provisions of this Agreement. 7.9 Severability. If, for any reason, any part, term or provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal, void or unenforceable, the validity of the remaining provisions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of the Parties shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular provision held to be invalid. If it should appear that any provision hereof is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, said provision which may conflict therewith shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith, and shall be deemed Jail Interlocal Agreement between City of Kent and Federal Way Page 8 of 9 modified to conform to such statutory provisions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: CITY OF KENT: Jim Ferrell, Mayor Dana Ralph, Mayor Dated: Dated: Attest: Stephanie Courtney, City Clerk Dated: Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: J. Ryan Call, City Attorney Arthur"Pat" Fitzpatrick, City Attorney Dated: Dated: Jail Interlocal Agreement between City of Kent and Federal Way Page 9 of 9 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July.......161h 2019 ITEM#: m ... ........................ CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: WA State Department of Corrections Master Agreement-Class V Community Restitution Programs POLICY QUESTION: Should Council approve the WA State Department of Corrections Master Agreement for Class V Community Restitution Programs and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement? COMMITTEE: Parks, Recreation, Human Services &Public Safety MEETING DATE: July 9th, 2019 CATEGORY: ® Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing F-1City Council Business El Resolution —Information Resolution ❑ Only STAFF REPORT BY: John Hutton,Parks Director DEPT: Parks Attachments: 1. BACKGROUND MEMO 2.MASTER AGREEMENT Options Considered: 1. Approve the WA State Department of Corrections Master Agreement for Class V Community Restitution Programs and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. 2. Do not approve the Master Agreement, and provide direction to staff. 3. --...._..... _ _ .._......_ ......... MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 MAYORAPPROVAL: 31QC � holy\ a'Q[, (,�J,114 DIRECTOR APPROVAL: Committee Council Initiall — J Initial/Date Initiat/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward the proposed Agreement to the July 16`h, 2019 consent agenda. mmittee Chair Commilteel Member ConindlKee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of the WA State Department of Corrections Master Agreement for Class V Community Restitution Programs and authorize the Mayor to sign said agreement." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED- 4/2019 RESOLUTION# 1�kCITY OF Federal Way ' Parks Department Date: July 2 d, 2019 To: Parks, Recreation, Human Services & Public Safety Council Committee Via: Mayor Jim Ferrell From: John Hutton, Parks Director Subject: WA State Department of Corrections Master Agreement— Class V Community Restitution Programs Background: The Parks Department has been researching alternative methods for the cleanup of homeless encampments throughout the City of Federal Way. Through that research, Parks Staff discovered that WA State Department of Corrections offers a program that could help with not only the homeless encampment cleanup, but additional needs across multiple city departments. Examples of additional services provided by WA State DOC include but are not limited to: stream enhancement & restoration, carpentry/construction, salmon restoration, tree planting, wood chipping, sand bagging, cleaning retention ponds, landscaping, sanding/salting, etc. At this time, staff is requesting approval of the WA State Department of Corrections Master Agreement, which would be valid until June 30, 2022. Under this Master Agreement, each city department would complete Attachment A on an annual basis to determine specific Work Project Descriptions and contract budget, (See Master Agreement, Page 1, Section 2, Work Project Descriptions). Each Attachment A completed annually will be brought before PRHSPS Council Committee for approval. Recommendation: City Council to Approve the WA State Department of Corrections Master Agreement for Class V Community Restitution Programs and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. Class V-Community Restitution Programs Master Agreement Between THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS And CITY OF FEDERAL WAY This Master Contract Agreement is entered into by and between the Washington State Department of Corrections, hereinafter referred to as DOC, and, the CITY OF FEDERAL WAY hereinafter referred to as the 'Recipient of the Services' or 'Recipient.' Individually referred to as party and collectively as parties. Legal authority for this Master Contract Agreement is pursuant to RCW 39.34, RCW 72.09 and Chapter 137-80 WAC. Individuals who provide services under this Master Agreement reside in the community. For the provision of services under this Master Agreement, all individuals are under Department, City, and/or County jurisdiction. 1. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to provide the master terms and conditions between the Parties for individuals under the jurisdiction of a governmental entity to provide work crew services to the Recipient. To be eligible to receive services, the Recipient must be a federal agency, an agency of Washington State, a local government, federally recognized Indian tribe within Washington State, a public benefit nonprofit as defined by the IRS; a 501(c)(3) Charitable Organization or a 501(c)(4) Social Welfare Organization. No public employees will be displaced as a result of this Agreement. On January 1, 2016, the terms and conditions contained in this Master Agreement replaced and terminated any previous oral and written work crew agreements and work project descriptions between the Parties. For this Master Agreement to be valid it must be signed by the Secretary of DOC or the DOC Contracts Administrator on behalf of DOC. 2. WORK PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Offender work crew projects are limited to those that can be properly supervised as determined by the DOC Field Administrator, Work Release and Residential Program Administrator, or designee and the Recipient's Contract Manager. Each project is subject to careful review for security requirements. Each distinct project requires a separate Work Project Description that is signed by both Parties to this Agreement. [See Attachment A] The Work Project Description will detail the work to be done by individuals,the cost to the Recipient and other specifics of the particular project. A Field Administrator or Work Release and Residential Program Administrator is authorized to sign Work Project Descriptions on behalf of DOC. A Work Project Description may be valid for up to one year but must end prior to, or on the same date as, this Master Contract Agreement. All services provided under each signed Work Project Description shall be performed pursuant to the terms of this Master Agreement. State of Washington K Page 1 of 6 Department of Corrections 198362/64 3. TERM The term of this Master Contract Agreement shall begin upon final signature and continue through June 30,2022,unless terminated sooner as provided for herein. 4. BILLING and PAYMENT In consideration of the services provided hereunder,payment to DOC will be as follows: A. DOC will invoice the Recipient for payment by the 20th of the month following each month in which individuals services were provided. Invoices for payment will include all direct and indirect charges payable to DOC by the Recipient that were negotiated between the Parties, except that payment for individuals L&I insurance coverage will be paid directly to L&I by the Recipient and will not appear on DOC invoices. B. Payment by the Recipient, will be due to the DOC address indicated below within 30 calendar days of the date of the invoice. This DOC Master Agreement number and the location of the project for which payment is made must be included with each payment. C. DOC requires the Recipient of individuals'services to provide workers'compensation insurance for the individuals who provide services to the Recipient under the terms of this Agreement. Therefore,Recipient will: 1) Prior to contract execution, complete and submit to L&I, the Application for Elective Coverage of Excluded Employments, (L&I Form F213-112-000) to authorize the addition of individuals L&I Risk Classification 7203 to the Recipient's L&I Account; 2) Provide DOC with a copy of the Rate Notice received from L&I that confirms the addition of Risk Classification 7203 to the Recipient's L&1 Account. DOC advises the Recipient to include the L&I Rate Notice when returning this partially executed Agreement to DOC for final signature. 3) Each quarter, for individuals'services provided to the Recipient during the previous quarter, report to L&I the total number of individuals' hours worked and pay the total cost due for workers'compensation coverage directly to L&I for those individuals'hours. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY D. Addresses to use for Billing and Payment. ATTN: PARKS DEPT, JASON GERWEN 33325 8th AVENUE SOUTH 1) Billing-Invoices for payment will be submitted to FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003-6325 Payment—recipient will send payment to the address provided by the DOC Community Corrections location from which services were provided. 5. TERMINATION When in its own best interest, either Party may terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, upon 30 days' written notice to the other Party, beginning on the second day after mailing such notice. If this Agreement is so terminated each of the Parties shall be liable only in accordance with the terms of this Agreement for services rendered prior to the effective date of termination. State of Washington K Page 2 of 6 Department of Corrections 198362/64 6. HAZARD ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION A. In accordance with the DOC Office of Risk Management, work generally considered to be dangerous or hazardous may not be performed by individuals. B. Before DOC individuals may provide services at any new and distinct project location, the Recipient will assess the location for hazardous conditions and/or materials. C. The Recipient's assessment must be performed in accordance with WAC 296-800-160 and provided to DOC using DOC Form 03-247 or other similar hazard assessment and PPE selection worksheet. The Recipient will inform DOC promptly,in writing,if hazardous conditions or materials are found at the new project site. D. Once notified,DOC at its own discretion,may a)identify,with the Recipient,the protective equipment or clothing that is needed for individuals and correctional officers to mitigate the effects of the on-site hazard(s);or b)request that the Recipient remove or otherwise mitigate the hazard before individuals perform the contracted work crew services at that site;or c)withdraw from the project. E. if hazardous conditions or materials are discovered while individuals are working at Recipient's site,then individuals work will be suspended immediately and Recipient will make appropriate regulatory notifications and request further assessment. 7. TOOLS,EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES In General 1) DOC will provide individuals with basic work attire, such as boots, gloves, goggles and rain gear,that may be needed for any project; 2) If the Parties to this Agreement do not negotiate otherwise, the Recipient will provide any additional tools,equipment and supplies that individuals need to accomplish the Recipient's specific work project. This will include any Personal Protective Equipment(PPE) e.g. bump hats, specialized goggles or gloves, hearing and eye protective devices, etc. and any specialized safety equipment(SSE)necessary to protect individuals and correctional officers from hazards at the project site. 3) The specific tools, equipment and supplies necessary for each project, and the Party to the Agreement responsible for providing each item, will be designated in the Work Project Description for that project. 8. TRAINING A. The Recipient will train individuals regarding the work to perform as well as any safety requirements specific to the project site and the use of any specialized equipment. B. The Recipient will ensure that all safety training is in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations including, but not limited to, Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) regulations and the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act(WISHA). State of Washington K Page 3 of 6 Department of Corrections 198362/64 9. CONTRACT MANAGEMENT The contract manager(s) for each of the Parties shall be responsible for and shall be the contact person(s) for all communications regarding the performance of this Agreement. Either Party may, with written notice to the other,designate different contact persons. Recipient: Name: JASON GERWEN, PARK & FACILITIES MANAGER Phone: DESK: 253-835-6962 CELL: 253-261-3941 Email: JASON.GERWEN@CITYOFFEDERALWAY.COM DOC: Vander ,g;.. Phone:253-786-3276 Email:rjvertaft,tdocl.wa.gum 10. SUPERVISION A. The Work: Recipient will supervise the work performed by individuals and maintain daily oversight of the project until completed. Recipient will provide adequate worksite instruction and direction to all individuals,to ensure safe work performance and proper project outcome. B. Securith•: A first aid qualified Correctional Officer will supervise individuals at all times. Such DOC supervision shall only be for the security and custody of the individuals and the safety of the public at large. C. Correctional Officers may not supervise the work performed by individuals or be responsible for project outcomes. D. On-Site 111nesslAccidents: In the event of individuals' illness or injury, DOC will provide the appropriate first aid. If necessary,emergency medical assistance will be called,or the individuals will be transported to the nearest medical facility for treatment. 1) x en a) Illness. DOC will pay all expenses related to treatment of individual's illness. b) Injury. The cost of treatment provided to individuals beyond first aid for any and all work related injuries will be paid in accordance with Title 51 RCW. c) The Recipient's L&I Account Number, 674-570-Do, will be the account number used by individuals,DOC and medical providers when reporting an individual's work related injury. 11.PUBLIC INFORMATION Neither Party shall arrange for news media coverage without the consent of the other Party, nor shall either Party release information to the news media without the consent of the other Party,unless required by law. State of Washington K Page 4 of 6 Department of Corrections 198362/64 12. WORK PRODUCT and PERFORMANCE A. Washington State and DOC,including its agents and/or employees: 1) Are not responsible for, and do not guarantee, the quality of the work performed or products produced by individuals on work crews,- 2) rews;2) Shall not be required to pay other workers to re-do or repair the work performed by the individuals;and 3) Are not responsible for damages to third Parties resulting from the work performed or products produced by individuals on work crews. 13.INDEMNIFICATION A. Recipient,its agents,and/or employees: 1) Are responsible for any damages resulting from the negligence of the Recipient, its agents,and/or employees; and 2) Do indemnify,defend, and hold harmless DOC for claims arising from the negligent acts or omissions of the Recipient,its agents,and/or employees. B. DOC,its agents,and/or employees: 1) Are responsible for damages that arise out of DOC, its agents, and/or employees' negligent security,supervision of individuals. C. In accordance with the laws of the state of Washington and to the extent permitted by law, if both Parties to this Agreement are negligent and jointly liable, each Party will assume responsibility for its own negligent acts or omissions. 14. TRANSPORTATION DOC has sole responsibility to transport individuals to and from the work project site. 15. DISPUTES Should the Parties hereto be unable to informally resolve any dispute concerning the terms of this Agreement, the dispute will be settled in binding arbitration by an arbitrator chosen by consent of both Parties. 16. INSURANCE Recipient will provide DOC with proof of current general liability insurance coverage when signing and returning this Agreement for final signature by DOC. Recipient must maintain its policy of general liability insurance throughout the term of this Agreement and provide renewed proof of such coverage to DOC annually with each new Work Project Description. Recipient's liability insurance coverage must have a limit of not less than$1,000,000 per each occurrence with an aggregate limit of at least$2,000,000. 17. PUBLIC BENEFIT NON-PROFIT In order to utilize individuals work crew services, Recipients that are non-profits,must be public benefit non-profits, as defined by the federal Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Those that are public benefit non- State of Washington K Page 5 of 6 Department of Corrections 198362/64 profits must provide proof to DOC of official IRS designation as a (501(c)(3) Charitable Organization or a (501(c)(4)Social Welfare Organization. The Recipient must provide DOC with proof of its IRS public benefit non-profit designation,with this partially signed Agreement when returning this partially signed Agreement to DOC Contracts and Legal Affairs for the final signature by DOC. 18. CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS Changes or modifications to this Agreement shall not be binding unless agreed to in writing by the Parties hereto prior to such change or modification.Only the DOC Secretary or designee has the authority to alter,amend,modify,or waive any clause or condition of this Agreement for DOC. 19. WAIVER Waiver of any breach or default on any occasion shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach or default.Any waiver shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 20. SEVERABILITY If any term or condition of this Agreement is held invalid by any court, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the other terms and conditions of this Agreement. 21. INTEGRATION This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Parties.No understandings or otherwise regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind either of the Parties hereto. As used herein, reference to the Agreement shall include this Master Agreement, fully executed amendments to this Agreement, and any Work Project Descriptions executed and attached hereto. THIS Agreement, consisting of six (6) pages and one (1) attachment, is executed by the persons signing below who warrant that they have the authority to execute the Agreement. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (Signature) (Signature) (Printed Name) (Printed Name) Contracts Administrator (Title) (Title) (Daae) (Date) Approved as to Form; By State of Washington K Page 6 of 6 Department of Corrections 195362/64 7COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITF.' _!—a ................. ...........................- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:RESOLUTION:RESOLUTION TO FORM THE NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2 AND CALL FOR A VOTE BY AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS ON THE FORMATION OF THE PROPOSED DISTRICT. POLICY QUESTION: Should Council approve a Resolution to renew the North Lake Management District Number 2 and call for a vote by affected property owners on the renewal of the proposed district? COMMITTEE: N/A MEETING DATE:N/A CATEGORY: ❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance ® Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ® Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT.BY: Leah Myhre, Water uali Coordinator LM DEPT: Public Works _ .,, Q... .. ......... Attachments: Staff Report Proposed Resolution Options Considered: 1. Approve the proposed resolution to renew the North Lake Management District Number 2 and call for a vote by affected property owners on the renewal of the proposed district. 2. Do not approve the resolution and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECON]ME iON: Option 1. MAYOR APPROVAL: � `'�[ DIRECTOR APPROVAL: ' � Co it"' Council !r it laic Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:N/A Mark Koppang, Committee Chair Jesse Johnson, Committee Member Hoang Tran,Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to approve the proposed resolution. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S 2EFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—12/2017 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 16, 2019 TO: City Council VIA: Jim Ferrell,Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E., Public Works Director Leah Myhre, Water Quality Coordinator UA SUBJECT: Resolution to Renew North Lake Management District Number 2 and Call for a Vote by Affected Property Owners on the Renewal of the Proposed District FINANCIAL IMPACTS: North Lake Management District Number 2 (NLMD) activities are funded through the collection of special assessments that will be collected annually. These assessments are collected from property owners having properties adjacent to North Lake with lakefront footage or with deeded lake access. All City of Federal Way staff activities related to the NLMD are funded through these assessments, and thus will have no direct financial impacts on the City. BACKGROUND: After 10 years of successful lake management, 2019 will bring to a close the existing North Lake Management District Number 2 (2010-2019). The NLMD provides an organizational structure and funding mechanism that allows for proactive lake management activities focusing on the protection and enhancement of water quality, recreational use, and aesthetic value of North Lake. NLMD Advisory Committee members and other affected property owners are now interested in renewing the NLMD for another 10-year period. Attached to the Resolution as Exhibit A, is a signed petition to the City of Federal Way City Council to renew the North Lake Management District Number 2. The petition meets the criteria set forth in RCW 36.61.030 for the initiation of a Lake Management District, and the LMD management goals contained therein are based on the 2004 North Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP) and subsequent Annual Reports (2005-2018) (together the "Plan"). This Plan is attached to the Resolution as Exhibit B. NLMD Advisory Committee members determined that the IAVMP did not require an update and, when accompanied by the subsequent Annual Reports, provides a sufficient basis for guiding the work plans and management goals for the renewed NLMD(2020-2029). At the May 21, 2019 City Council meeting, a public hearing date concerning the reformation of the NLMD was set for July 16, 2019, and a resolution of intent to reform the NLMD was adopted. Following the public hearing on July 16, 2019, City Council is being asked to approve the attached resolution to renew the North Lake Management District Number 2 and call for a vote by the affected property owners on the renewal of the proposed district. If the resolution is adopted, voting ballots will be prepared and mailed out to the affected parties based upon criteria in RCW 36.61.080. If the renewal of the NLMD is approved by the voters (simple majority required), then an ordinance creating the NLMD will be drafted for consideration by the City Council. Following the adoption of the Ordinance, an assessment roll will be created, published, and sent to the affected property owners. A public hearing will also be set regarding the assessment roll, after which resolutions establishing the July 16,2019 City Council Renew North Lake Management District Number 2 and Call for a Vote Page 2 assessment roll and North Lake Advisory Committee will be brought before City Council for consideration. The adoption of an ordinance establishing the time of payment, interest, and penalties will then be brought before Council. The final step in the renewal process is the selection and appointment of the North Lake Management District Advisory Committee. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City of Federal Way, Washington, to renew North Lake Management District Number 2 and call for a vote by affected property owners on the renewal of the proposed district. WHEREAS,the term of the current North Lake Management District Number 2 will expire at the end of 2019; and WHEREAS,North Lake contains significant natural resources,e.g.,wetlands,and supports many beneficial purposes including recreation,water quality,stormwater protection,aesthetics,and property value support; and WHEREAS,pursuant to Chapter 35.21 RCW and Chapter 36.61 RCW a lake management district may be formed to provide funding to support the maintenance and improvement of lakes;and WHEREAS,the North Lake community has demonstrated continued support for the North Lake Management District Number 2 ("District") through submittal of a petition calling for the renewal of the District (Exhibit A)pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 36.61 RCW; and WHEREAS,the City completed the attached 2004 North Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan ("IAVMP") and subsequent Annual Reports (2005-2018) (together the "Plan") (Exhibit B),that provides the basis for the annual work plans and management goals of the District; and WHEREAS, the District Advisory Committee determined that the 2004 IAVMP remains valid and did not require an update; and WHEREAS, the Plan was initiated because of citizen interest in the long term protection of North Lake; and Resohction No. 19- Rev 1/]9 WHEREAS,pursuant to a City resolution, a public hearing was conducted on July 16,2019, on the renewal of the District after public notice of the hearing was provided to all affected property owners consistent with Chapter 36.61 RCW; and WHEREAS, after considering the testimony received at the public hearing, the City of Federal Way City Council declares that submitting the question of renewal of the District to a vote by the affected property owners is within the public's interest, and the proposed financing for the District is considered feasible. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. The City of Federal Way City Council finds that it is in the public interest to renew the North Lake Management District Number 2 (the "District") and that the financing of the lake improvement and maintenance activities is feasible. Attached as Exhibit A is the Petition to the Federal Way City Council to Renew the District for 2020-2029 that describes(1) the proposed improvement and maintenance activities that avoid adverse impacts on fish and wildlife and provide for appropriate measures to protect and enhance fish and wildlife; (2) the number of years the District will exist; (3) the amount, method, description, and frequency of special assessments or rates and charges,and the possibility of revenue bonds that are payable from the rates and charges; and (4) the estimated special assessment or rates and charges proposed to be imposed on each parcel included in the proposed lake management district.Attached as Exhibit B is the 2004 North Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan ("IAVMP") and subsequent Annual Reports(2005-2018) (together the"Plan")that provides a sufficient basis for guiding the work plans and management goals of the renewed District. Resolution No. 19- Rev 1/19 Section 2.Vote of Affected Property Owners. The renewal of the District shall be referred to a vote of the property owners within the proposed management district.The residents' Petition to the Federal Way City Council to Renew the Lake Management District Number 2 for North Lake,2020- 2029 is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. The City Clerk of Federal Way shall prepare the appropriate ballot,based upon criteria in RCW 36.61.080,calling for a vote on the formation of the District.The ballots shall be submitted to the affected residents no later than August 2,2019,and shall be returned to the City of Federal Way by no later than five p.m.(5:00 p.m.) on August 23, 2019. All ballots must be signed by the owner or reputed owner of property according to the assessor's tax rolls. Each property owner shall mark his or her ballot for or against the renewal of the proposed District,with the ballot weighted so that the property owner has one vote for each dollar of estimated special assessment or rate and charge proposed to be imposed on his or her property. The valid ballots shall be tabulated and a simple majority of the votes cast shall determine whether the proposed District shall be approved or rejected. If approved by the voters within the proposed District,the implementation of the District will be effective January 1,2020,and shall remain in effect for a term of ten (10) years, and shall expire on December 31, 2029. Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence,clause or phrase of this resolution should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution. Section 4. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this resolution are authorized to make necessary corrections to this resolution including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, resolution numbering, section/subsection numbers and any Resolution No. 19- Rev 1/19 references thereto. Section 5. Ratification.Any act consistent with the authority andprior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 6.Effective Date.This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the Federal Way City Council. RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON this day of , 20l. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: JIM FERRELL, MAYOR ATTEST: STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO.: Resolution No. 19- Rev 1/19 EXHIBIT A Petition to the Federal Way City Council to Renew the Lake Management District Number 2 for North Lake,2020-2029 We,the undersigned North Lake property owners, request that the Federal Way City Council renew the Lake Management District(LMD)Number 2 for North Lake pursuant to RCW 36.61 that will otherwise expire in 2019. The LMD funds will finance efforts to protect and enhance North Lake in terms of water quality, recreational uses, and aesthetic value. 1. Purpose of the Lake Management District • Form a Lake Management District that creates a funding source and an operational program for all future designated aquatic plant management, water quality management, and maintenance and monitoring activities. • Perform annual diver surveys to monitor changes in the aquatic plant community. • Control, remove, and contain aquatic plants, specifically non-native populations at as low a density as is environmentally and economically feasible, and at levels that will not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. • Reduce all other identified species of noxious weeds per the requirements of WAC 16-750 and even further, to levels that do not impact public safety, beneficial uses, or ecology of the lake. • Use appropriate aquatic plant control and treatment methods as needed for all other problematic aquatic weeds, using the best available science to identify and understand their effects on human, aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems prior to implementation. • Assess, improve, and monitor water levels and water quality. • Continue public education to prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants and non-native animal species to the lake; and to aid in the early detection of aquatic weed re-infestations. • Conduct a volunteer-driven water quality monitoring program that will track lake health based on the collection of data, including but not limited to: water level, temperature, Secchi depth, phosphorous and nitrogen. • Conduct public education to reduce the amounts of non-point source pollutants entering the lake, which can result in increased aquatic algae. • Continue to involve the North Lake Community in lake quality improvement. • Advocate for the preservation of the forested lakeshore and wetlands of the former Weyerhaeuser Campus in Federal Way, a vital component of the North Lake-Hylebos watershed. • Uphold the Shoreline Management Act that protects shoreline natural resources against adverse environmental impacts. The 2004 North Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP) and subsequent Annual Reports (2005-2018) include the basis for the annual LMD work plan and LMD management goals. The LMD will reimburse the City for costs incurred by staff in providing aquatic vegetation program management tasks. All management district lake improvement and maintenance activities described in RCW 36.61.020 may be considered in the LMD scope, including: (1) controlling or removing North Lake LMD Petition Pagel of 5 aquatic plants and vegetation; (2) improving water quality; (3) controlling water levels; (4)treating and diverting stormwater; (5) controlling agricultural waste; (6) studying lake water quality problems and solutions; (7) cleaning and maintaining ditches and streams entering the lake; (8)monitoring air quality; and(9)the related administrative, engineering, legal, and operational costs, including the costs of creating the LMD. 2. Boundary The proposed boundary of the LMD would include all property with lakefront on North Lake, and two individual adjacent properties that have lake access deeds. See attached map of proposed properties within the district. 3. Duration The proposed duration of the LMD renewal is 10 years. 4. Charges to Property Owners Annual rates and charges will be used to raise funds to support LMD activities. The following is the formula of rates and charges proposed for establishment of the assessment role for the LMD: Assessment Category Rate Revenue ($) Single Family Residential (RS9.6), Lakefront property Developed property (57 units) X$ 125.00 per unit $7,125 Vacant property (220 ft) X$0.85 per lakefront foot $187 Single Family Residential (RS9.6), Non-lakefront property with deeded lake access Developed property (2 units) X$90.00 per unit $180 Weyerhaeuser(CP-1) Commercial property (3,796 ft) X$ 1.00 per lakefront foot $3,796 WDFW Public Boat Launch Single annual assessment $4,000 TOTAL ANNUAL ASSESSMENT $15,288 It is proposed that unallocated funds in the current LMD at the end of 2019 roll over into the LMD Number 2 for North Lake, 2020-2029. The estimated maximum amount that is proposed for the LMD in 2020 is $15,288.00. An automatic increase based on the Seattle Consumer Price Index(CPI) will be included in each annual billing after 2020 per approval by the North Lake Advisory Committee. At no time is the increase to be more than five(5) percent per year. Total maximum LMD rate revenue for the ten-year LMD based on an annual five percent increase for inflation is $192,290.82. Issuance of revenue bonds is not proposed. North Lake LMD Renewal 2020-2029 Petition Page 2 of 5 The LMD budget and rates will be approved through a public hearing and a public vote after the city council adopts a resolution to form the LMD. Once approved by the public and city council,the annual rates and charges may not be altered without another public vote and city council approval with the exception of the CPI increase described above. 5. North Lake Management District Advisory Committee The volunteer North Lake Management District Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) is proposed to represent the interests of LMD property owners in the various neighborhoods around the lake. City staff will work with the Advisory Committee to develop the annual work plan. The annual LMD work plan and budget will be forwarded by the Advisory Committee for implementation by the City's surface water utility. The Advisory Committee will track and review activities and expenditures by the City as well as outside contractors. City staff will provide Advisory Committee support including quarterly financial reports. North Lake LMD Renewal 2020-2029 Petition Page 3 of 5 Petition to the Federal Way City Council to Renew the Lake Managenient District Nuzaber 2 for North Lake,2020-M2 RC W 36.61-030—A lake management district may be initiated upon either the adoption of a resolution of intention by a county legislative authority or the filing of a petition signed by ten landowners or the owners of at least fifteen percent of the acreage contained within the proposed lake management district.whichever is greater. ff Signature of Property Owner Full Address Parcel Number(if known) k f rzw-731t(,q -33�� L' 2. WA A 3. �zE 4. 5.kA-u tkr ^- 6. 8. 9. ,J r'J 1&0l 12. - v�J�- J 3 bl'% 12 AV2 S 14.15, Tr > 1nJ kri 16. vf--- 3 5/�,5. 3 3rr�=�s .Fj ��,o r 19 -?,; 1 North Lake LMD Renewal 2020-2029 Petition Page 4 of 5 Petition to the Federal Way City Council to Renew the Lake Management District `umber 2 for North Lake,2020-2029 RCW 36.6LO30—A lake management district maybe initiated upon either the adoption ofaresolution ointention by a co=y legislative authority or the filing of petition signed by tea landowners or the owners of at least fifteen percent of the acreage contained within the proposed take management district,whichever is greater. Signature of Property Owner Full Address Parcel Number(if known) 21. X�L 23, f.�`C tr�. `' �.1� Z6 .5 24.r- 3(C> 33L4 V- 25. f//'L 7–XPi,7 27. 6,5: 28. 3MI 3aaPL� 29' 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. North Lake LMD Renewal 2020-2029 Petition Page 5 of 5 Petition to the Federal Way City Council to Renew the Lake Management District Number 2 for North Lake, 2020-2029 RCW 36.61.030—A lake management district may be initiated upon either the adoption of a resolution of inantion by a county legislative authority or the filing of a petition signed by ten landowners or the owners of at least fifteen percent of the acreage contained within the proposed lake management district,whichever is greater. Signature of Property Owner Full Address Parcel Number(if known) 2. C'yrrlht� two l;cfIM, 1441 V.)WO 417 nra�ru�cr-Cu�Fx: 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. ll. i 12. 13. 14, 15. 16. 17.. 18. 19. 20. North Lake UYID Renew.d 2020-2029 Petition Page 4 of 5 EXHIBIT B North Lake - - Integrated Aquatic LLVegetation Manaement Plan g October 2004 a qu y t v King County North Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan * King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Lake Stewardship Program Noxious Weed Control Program King Street Center 201 South Jackson, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 296-6519 TTY Relay : 711 www.metrokc.gov/dnr October 2004 King County Executive Ron Sims Director of Department of Natural Resources and Parks Pam Bissonnette Division Manager of Water and Land Resources Division Daryl Grigsby Water and Land Resources Division Staff Sally Abella Beth Cullen Drew Kerr Michael Murphy Washington State Department of Ecology Staff Kathy Hamel North Lake Community Steering Committee Mark Braverman Debra Hansen Julie Cleary Wendy Honey Beth Cullen Tom Jovanovich Chuck Gibson Cover Photos: North Lake Improvement Club North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The King County Lake Stewardship Program and the Noxious Weed Control Program wish to thank the members of the Steering Committee for the North Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan. Members include Mark Braverman, Julie Cleary, Beth Cullen, Chuck Gibson, Debra Hansen, Wendy Honey, and Tom Jovanovich. King County staff were instrumental in developing the IAVMP. Key staff included Drew Kerr and Monica Walker of the Noxious Weed Control Program, as well as Sally Abella, Michael Murphy(Murph), and Beth Cullen from the Lake Stewardship Program. Washington Department of Ecology staff provided invaluable technical guidance during development of the IAVMP. Special thanks to Kathy Hamel of the Aquatic Weeds Management Fund for her prompt, thoughtful and thorough response to all questions. Finally, special thanks to the North Lake community. Their enthusiasm and dedication to preserving the aesthetic beauty, recreational opportunities, and ecological integrity of North Lake is inspiring. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................... 1 PROBLEM STATEMENT..................................................................................................... 2 MANAGEMENTGOALS ...................................................................................................... 4 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT.......................................................................................... 5 CommunityHistory................................................................................................................ 5 CommunityCommitment ...................................................................................................... 6 Steering Committee, Outreach, and Education Process......................................................... 7 Publiccomment...................................................................................................................... 9 Publicconsensus.................................................................................................................... 9 Continuing Community Education........................................................................................ 9 WATERSHED AND WATERBODY CHARACTERISTICS .......................................... 12 WaterbodyCharacteristics................................................................................................... 13 WaterQuality....................................................................................................................... 14 Fish and Wildlife Communities........................................................................................... 15 Beneficial and Recreational Uses......................................................................................... 18 Characterization of Aquatic Plants in North Lake............................................................... 19 Noxious Aquatic Weeds in North Lake............................................................................... 23 AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL ALTERNATIVES ..........................................................26 AquaticHerbicides............................................................................................................... 26 ManualMethods .................................................................................................................. 36 DiverDredging .................................................................................................................... 39 BottomScreens.................................................................................................................... 41 BiologicalControl................................................................................................................ 43 GrassCarp............................................................................................................................ 45 WatermilfoilWeevil............................................................................................................. 49 Rotovation, Harvesting, and Cutting.................................................................................... 51 Drawdown............................................................................................................................ 52 NutrientReduction............................................................................................................... 52 NoAction Alternative.......................................................................................................... 53 INTEGRATED TREATMENT PLAN................................................................................ 54 Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum)................................................................. 54 Fragrant waterlily(Nymphaea odorata)............................................................................... 56 Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria)................................................................................. 57 Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus)...................................................................................... 57 PLAN ELEMENTS, COSTS,AND FUNDING.................................................................. 58 IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION...................................................................... 63 BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................. 64 North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Average Values for Select Trophic Parameters at North Lake.................................. 15 Table2: Wildlife List............................................................................................................... 17 Table 3: 1996 Aquatic Plant Survey........................................................................................ 22 Table 4: Budget with use of Triclopyr..................................................................................... 58 Table 5: Project budget with use of 2,4-D ............................................................................... 59 Table 6: Total Matching Funds (triclopyr) .............................................................................. 60 Table 7: Total Matching Funds (2,4-D)................................................................................... 61 Table 8: In-kind Matching Funds............................................................................................. 61 Table9: Cash Matching Funds ................................................................................................ 61 Table 10: KC Staff Salary and Burden Rates........................................................................... 62 Table 11: Federal Way Staff and Benefit Rates....................................................................... 62 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: North Lake Watershed and Tributary 0016.............................................................. 13 Figure 2: North Lake Land Use.........................................................................20 Figure 3: North Lake Aquatic Plant Map.............................................................22 North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) is a submersed aquatic noxious weed that proliferates to form dense mats of vegetation in the littoral zone of lakes and reservoirs. It reproduces by fragmentation, and is often spread as fragments that"hitch-hike" on boat trailers from one lake to another. This noxious weed can degrade the ecological integrity of a water body in just a few growing seasons. Dense stands of milfoil crowd out native aquatic vegetation, which in turn alters predator-prey relationships among fish and other aquatic animals. M. spicatum can also reduce dissolved oxygen—first by inhibiting water mixing in areas where it grows, and then as oxygen is consumed by bacteria during decomposition of dead plant material. Decomposition of M. spicatum also adds nutrients to the water that could contribute to increased algal growth and related water quality problems. Further, dense mats of M. spicatum can increase the water temperature by absorbing sunlight, create mosquito breeding areas, and negatively affect recreational activities such as swimming, fishing, and boating. North Lake lies along the eastern border of Federal Way in the upper White River watershed in King County Washington. The 55-acre lake is moderately infested with M. spicatum. Members of the North Lake Improvement Club (NLIC)realized the seriousness of the aquatic weed problem and initiated a partnership with staff from the King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Weyerhaeuser, and the City of Federal Way to apply for an Aquatic Weeds Management Fund grant through the Washington Department of Ecology(Ecology). If awarded, grant money will fund initial eradication efforts, as well as several years of follow-up survey and control. Since complete eradication is very difficult to achieve, and re-introduction is very likely, the community is organizing a management structure and the funding mechanisms necessary to implement ongoing monitoring and spot control. Three other noxious weed species with expanding infestations at North Lake also threaten to degrade the ecological and recreational benefits of the system. Fragrant waterlily(Nymphaea odorata), purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), and yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) have expanded beyond a pioneering level of infestation and are well established around the shoreline and in the lake. This Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP) is a planning document developed to ensure that the applicant(King County) and the community have considered the best available information about the waterbody and the watershed prior to initiating control efforts. Members of the North Lake Improvement Club, King County staff, and Weyerhaeuser staff worked in partnership to develop this IAVMP for North Lake. To tackle the difficult task of generating community concern and action for an environmental issue, a core group of residents formed a steering committee, which included one King County staff member from the King County Lake Stewardship Program. Through their work, the Steering Committee was able to educate the wider community about the problem, inspire them to contribute feedback about potential treatment options, and explore ongoing community-based funding mechanisms. The community ultimately agreed upon an integrated treatment strategy, which includes an initial chemical treatment with a systemic aquatic herbicide, followed by a combination of manual, mechanical, and cultural control methods to maintain the outcome. This plan presents lake and watershed characteristics, details of the aquatic weed problems at North Lake, the process for gaining community involvement, discussion of control alternatives, and recommendations for initial and ongoing control of noxious aquatic weeds threatening North Lake. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 1 PROBLEM STATEMENT North Lake is located east of the city of Federal Way and Interstate 5, south of 3201h Street and north of Highway 18. The lake is located in the White River Watershed(WRIA 10), which encompasses parts of southern King County and extends into Pierce County. North Lake is located in a very urban area of King County along with neighboring lakes Lake Killarney, Lake Geneva, and Fivemile Lake. However, at this time Weyerhaeuser has no intention of developing the west side of the lake. The 52.3 acres of land owned and maintained by Weyerhaeuser will remain undeveloped. Only the eastern and southern shorelines of the lake are developed with single family residences. North Lake drains into the Commencement Bay through the Hylebos Creek. In the past Hylebos Creek has provided good habitat for chinook salmon but the system has undergone extensive development over the years and salmon populations in the Hylebos Basin have been greatly reduced(Mobrand Biometrics, 2001). The estuarine area is still used by juvenile salmonid species including chinook and coho. North Lake and neighboring Geneva, Killarney, and Fivemile Lakes all have public boat launches and are popular boating, fishing, and swimming destinations. Residents of the North Lake watershed are very proud of their setting, are active recreational users and are committed to social and environmental issues. Due to prolific growth of several species of dense, invasive aquatic noxious weeds,North Lake is in danger of losing its aesthetic beauty, its wildlife habitat, and its recreational attributes. If left untreated, the worst of these weeds, Eurasian water milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), will blanket the littoral zone of the lake in a short time, preventing most recreational uses and eliminating badly needed wildlife habitat. There will be long-term financial and recreational loss and the loss of conservation areas, all affecting watershed residents and other members of the public who use the lake. Increasing development in the area is likely to increase the number of people using the lake in coming years, which can accelerate the magnitude of the loss of beneficial uses to the community. The shallow shoreline area of the lake provides excellent habitat for aquatic plants. In the past few years aggressive, non-native Eurasian water milfoil (milfoil)has invaded the lake and is colonizing the near-shore aquatic habitat. The dense submersed growth of milfoil has begun to cause a significant deterioration in the quality of the lake and its value to the community. The boat launch area has dense patches of milfoil, which can spread to other lakes by fragments on boat trailers. Nearby lakes are threatened with new introductions of milfoil if North Lake is not controlled because of the high probability of transport by boat trailers to these nearby systems. Milfoil is the most significant submersed invasive threat but other noxious weeds have also invaded North Lake. These include fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata), purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), and yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus). All of these species are considered noxious weeds as listed in WAC 16-750. Waterlilies have been a real threat to the lake, covering up sections of the lake entirely. North Lake is shallow and waterlilies grow in the middle of the lake and close off sections of the lake from recreational activities. This has been a major issue with area residents as it has decreased their recreation because of safety issues. Waterlilies can also affect water quality by decreasing dissolved oxygen, out competing native plants, and adding excessive nutrients to the lake when they die back in the fall. None of the native aquatic plants in the system are a management issue at this time. The native plants provide important benefits to the aquatic system and are not impeding any of the recreational uses of the lake. Removing the noxious invaders will halt the degradation of the system and allow the dynamic natural equilibrium to be maintained. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 2 Unfortunately, these invasive plants concentrate in the near shore zone which is also that portion of the lake that is valued and utilized most by lake residents and visitors. Dense weed growth poses a threat to swimmers, and the portion of the lake where people can fish is shrinking. Both milfoil and fragrant waterlilies foul fishing gear, motors, and oars. It is no longer possible to troll through large portions of the lake. As a group these invasive plants: • Pose a safety hazard to swimmers and boaters by entanglement • Snag fishing lines and hooks, eventually preventing shoreline fishing • Crowd out native plants, creating monocultures lacking in biodiversity • Significantly reduce fish and wildlife habitat, thereby weakening the local ecosystem as well as degrading wildlife and wildlife viewing opportunities • Pose a threat to adjoining ecosystems North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 3 MANAGEMENT GOALS The overarching management goal is to control noxious aquatic weeds in North Lake in a manner that allows sustainable native plant and animal communities to thrive, maintains acceptable water quality conditions, and facilitates recreational enjoyment of the lake. There are four main strategies to ensure success in meeting this goal: 1. Involve the community in each phase of the management process; 2. Use the best available science to identify and understand likely effects of management actions on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems prior to implementation; 3. Review the effectiveness of management actions; 4. Adjust the management strategy as necessary to achieve the overall goal. Specific details related to the implementation of management objectives are covered in subsequent sections of this plan. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 4 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT North Lake residents have been a very active community from the beginning and regularly demonstrate their commitment to improving their community and protecting the lake as well as the expansive natural areas owned by Weyerhaeuser around their homes. This section provides an overview of past, present, and future of community involvement. Community History From their earliest days, members of the North Lake community have worked together to promote common goals, including the health of the lake. The North Lake Improvement Club (NLIC)was formed in 1942 to work to maintain and improve North Lake and the region around the lake. The club has always been open to anyone living in the area. The NLIC purchased a piece of property and built a clubhouse in the early 1950's. The clubhouse has provided a convenient place for the community to get together for social gatherings and meetings to plan and execute projects to improve the North Lake neighborhood. The club membership has been active in monitoring the development of the properties around North Lake and to ensure that changes are made in a manner that is consistent with the neighborhood desires. There has been significant development in the watershed in the last five years and the community has been active in monitoring the development plans to assure the lake is protected. NLIC as an organization and members as individuals have commented at hearings on developments now underway in the watershed and hearings on developments that may have an impact on the quality of living in the North Lake area. One of the currently vested development with the greatest potential to impact the lake through stormwater runoff has been required to have the stormwater management plan reviewed by representatives of the NLIC before it is approved by the City of Federal Way. Being a participant in the King County's Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program through the Lake Stewardship Program is another way the community demonstrates its interest and commitment to lake health. Area residents have participated in the program on and off for the last 19 years. Most recently, community members became involved in the program in 2001. Initially only one community member participated in the program, but with the expansion of the program to include Level 1 and Level 2 sampling, several members joined in to share the monitoring duties. There are now six families sharing the monitoring duties, giving North Lake the distinction of having a monitoring program with the most active community participation. Lake Stewardship Program volunteers monitor lake level and precipitation daily, Secchi transparency, water temperature, algae and bird observations weekly, and collect water samples every other week from April through October. Water samples are analyzed for total phosphorus, total nitrogen, chlorophyll a and concentrations of phytoplankton species. Volunteer data are published each year in reports produced by the King County Lake Stewardship Program. To address the increasing populations of waterlilies in North Lake, lakefront property owners contracted for control of waterlilies in 1996. The control was done for one year. The contractor completed two applications on the lily pads on the residential side of the lake. This was done only in areas that fronted on property owners who agreed to pay the contractors. Qualitative evaluation of the application indicated that it was successful and reduced the expansion of coverage on the residential North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 5 side of the lake for a few years. However, since there was not a lake wide effort to control the lilies in following years, the infestation returned and became worse. The membership of today's NLIC reflects the strength of new perspectives and energies. As homes change hands and the last developable land disappear, families on the lake share a love of this unique ecosystem, and are committed to honor and perpetuate the legacy of good stewardship. Community Commitment The NLIC has held several informational meetings for its membership and others to learn about noxious and invasive plants identification and control. The Club has and continues to be active in public meetings where new developments plans are discussed and present comments to assure the lake water quality and area environment will continue to be healthy. Examples of issues discussed by the Community Club in recent years include: • The impact of letting purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) continue to grow • How to eradicate purple loosestrife • Problems posed by fragrant waterlilies (Nymphaea odorata) • How to eradicate fragrant waterlilies The lakefront property owners have organized to obtain funding to begin a weed control program in 2004. A Small Change for a Big Difference grant was obtained from King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks (KCDNRP), which will be combined with funds from the Weyerhaeuser Company, and contributions and was used to begin waterlily control this year. The lakefront property owners intend to continue the effort to control the waterlilies and other noxious weeds in and around North Lake. The Steering Committee is spearheading this effort and is pursuing several options to eradicate noxious weeds and keep the lake free of noxious weeds in years to come. In the long run, success will require on ongoing funding mechanism for monitoring the success of control measures, surveying for noxious weed species each year, and responding to new infestations quickly to maintain a weed-free lake. The Steering Committee is exploring ways to provide maintenance funding in perpetuity. Community members are currently discussing several funding ideas; the best long-term solution will inevitably utilize multiple mechanisms. 1. Voluntary contributions: Having enough lake front property owners commit to annual maintenance fee to maintain a fund for control of the weeds. The funding goals would be adjusted annually to meet the needs, with the largest amount needed to support the initial eradication program. Volunteer monies would be collected in several ways, including running fundraising activities as well as door to door campaigning. Although less consistent, this type of activity is expected to work because of the stability of the neighborhood. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 6 2. Lake Management District (LMD): Forming an LMD would levy a"tax" on all lakefront property owners. The tax paid by each lakefront property owner would be determined by the size of the property. Funds collected would be used to address specific problems at the lake. In order to form an LMD, lakefront property owners need to vote to approve it, and the governing agency (King County or Federal Way)needs to adopt an ordinance recognizing the fee collection structure, problems to be addressed, and the methods by which problems will be addressed. 3. Volunteer maintenance: Train residents to perform the monitoring and removal efforts. There are certified divers on the lake. Funds would be collected by the Community Club to purchase necessary equipment and obtain training to conduct the milfoil removal operations by volunteers after the grant funds expire. Currently, lake residents perform invasive weed control efforts voluntarily on the emergent plants at North Lake. Steering Committee, Outreach, and Education Process Community participation has been an integral part of the development of the North Lake IAVMP. Community involvement educates community members about the potential problems posed by noxious aquatic weeds. Since watershed residents were given ample opportunity to comment throughout the process, there is greater community support for implementation efforts. Meeting agendas, attendance lists, and meeting notes are contained in Appendix A. The remainder of this section provides a chronological overview of the community involvement process from the first discussions through the completion of the IAVMP. Early Discussion: Explored potential for King County—North Lake partnership Initially, two board members of the North Lake Improvement Club and lakeside residents contacted King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Lake Stewardship Program staff in winter of 2003. North Lake residents were interested in controlling noxious weeds and through the support of the community, the North Lake Steering Committee was formed. Five resident members now sit on the committee. The North Lake Steering Committee wanted to apply to the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) Aquatic Weed Management Fund for money to help with North Lake weed control efforts in spring 2004. Given the amount of work required to develop an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan, which is necessary for the grant application,North Lake Steering Committee and King County staff decided it would be better to develop a strategy and work toward to applying for the grant in fall of 2004. March 2004: First meeting with North Lake Steering Committee North Lake Steering Committee invited a King County Lake Stewardship Program representative and a Weyerhaeuser representative to a North Lake Steering Committee meeting on March 17, 2004. This initial Steering Committee meeting was for general information to determine what partners on the North Lake project were setting out to accomplish and how this could be done as a joint effort between North Lake residents, Weyerhaeuser, and King County. The Steering Committee and King County staff discussed the process by which the community could work with King County to submit a grant application from Ecology to control noxious aquatic weeds in North Lake. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 7 April and May 2004: Project planning begins, Steering Committee meets,begins IAVMP Development A Steering Committee meeting was held on April 1, 2004 to discuss a King County Small Change grant application and initial notification to lakeside residents for an educational meeting to be held on April 5, 2004. The agenda and expectations were set for the meeting. The Steering Committee created and hand delivered all lakeside residents invitations to attend the education meeting. On April 5, 2004 thirty-two people attended the educational meeting. The primary purpose was to discuss the problem with Eurasian watermilfoil and other aquatic noxious weeds, management techniques and the IAVMP development process. The larger community's interest in furthering the process was also assessed, which was a resounding desire to pursue aquatic weed removal. Following the April 5th meeting, the Steering Committee members drafted and submitted the Small Change for a Big Difference Grant application to the King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks on April 17, 2004. This grant application helped support a joint waterlily treatment with Weyerhaeuser. In May of 2004 KC DNRP staff developed a draft of a project timeline, an education and outreach plan and began to research necessary components of the IAVMP. May 5, 2004 Beth Cullen from King County and North Lake Steering Committee members met to discuss the development of the IAVMP. The primary goal was to approve the project, address any concerns, and outline necessary tasks for the grant application process. A second IAVMP planning meeting was held at the end of May. Specific tasks were assigned to each Steering Committee member and timelines for the completion of draft assignments were set. At this meeting, members discussed the approval of the Small Change for a Big Difference grant and how to notify the lakeside residents for the beginning stages of the fragrant waterlily eradication. June 2004: Steering committee continues IAVMP work, hosts first watershed-wide meeting In the beginning of June, notification was distributed to all North Lake lakeside residents regarding the first chemical treatment for the waterlily control. The dates decided for treatment were June 17th and June 18th pending weather conditions. The treatment did occur and approximately 10 acres of waterlilies were treated,three acres on June 17th and 10 acres on the June 18th. The treatment was successful and there was immediate damage to the lilies. Over the course of the month the lilies died back and areas of the lake were again open for recreation. The lily treatment had a draw-back because it opened up new ground for the milfoil to spread. With the cover of the lilies gone, sunlight was able to get to the bottom of lake, which encouraged more aggressive milfoil growth. On June 14 , 2004 the Steering Committee and Beth Cullen from King County met to discuss the progress and agenda for a watershed-wide meeting scheduled for June 28, 2004. At the June 28th meeting the North Lake Steering Committee members presented the problems posed by the noxious aquatic weeds present in North Lake. Guests to this meeting included Beth Cullen from King County, Mark Braverman the Site Forestry Manager for Weyerhaeuser, Belinda Bowman, Whitworth Pest Solutions, and Dan Smith from the City of Federal Way. The objective of this meeting was to update the community on the waterlily eradication efforts and introduce the IAVMP. Before and after herbicide treatment photos were shown to the public. Beth Cullen provided a PowerPoint presentation giving a detailed description of the aquatic weeds in North Lake and the treatment methods selected by the North Lake Steering Committee. The meeting also provided open floor time for discussion and questions of all information presented. Members from neighboring Lake Geneva came to the watershed meeting to learn about the process to possibly emulate on their lake. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 8 Public comment At the initial lakeside resident meeting, presenters encouraged attendees to ask questions and offer comments. The first lakeside residents meeting on April 5th, most comments supported acting as quickly as possible to control weeds in the lake. There were questions about the effectiveness of the various treatment options presented. Several comments expressed concern that the community members would need to "foot the bill" for control costs. Steering Committee members addressed concerns when possible and if answers were not readily apparent, offered to do more research and report back. At the June 28th watershed wide meeting, residents were still enthusiastic about the project and the results they were beginning to see from the initial treatment of Rodeo TM applied by Whitworth Pest Solutions. Many residents inquired when another later summer spray could occur and what the costs would be. The only concerns expressed by residents were the safety of the chemicals used to control invasive weeds for swimming, watering, and pets. Public consensus Members of the steering committee drafted a"Letter of Support"that members of the community could sign to demonstrate their support of the proposed milfoil control strategy while recognizing its potential cost. To date, there have been no objections to the proposed project or for the proposed methods of treatment. Every person who has learned about the project has voiced support. Given the community's small size, and their dedication and enthusiasm for keeping North Lake healthy, none of the steering committee members anticipate resistance to the proposed project prior to, during, or after implementation. The letter of support and copies of the signature sheets are in Appendix B. Continuing Community Education The North Lake Steering Committee will offer the means by which the community will organize ongoing education. In addition, the Steering Committee for the proposed aquatic weed removal project will remain intact, although membership on the steering committee is likely to change over time. To ensure that community efforts are consistent with best available science and water quality standards, the community club will designate a point of contact liaison within the KC DNRP. Information will be disseminated through community club meetings and watershed mailings when applicable. A liaison with school and youth organizations will also be designated. Additionally, the Steering Committee will work to recruit new lake monitors and surveyors. All of the documents and PowerPoint presentations generated by the Watershed-wide and Steering Committee meetings are available on request. Links are provided to the websites for the Washington State Department of Ecology, the King County Noxious Weed Control Program, and the King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks to learn more about aquatic noxious weeds and other natural resource management issues. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 9 The public education program for North Lake will consist of two elements that will be implemented concurrently: 1. Noxious Aquatic Weeds Prevention and Detection Initial eradication and control efforts are only worth doing if future infestations are prevented, or detected and eliminated soon after detection. Since the re-introduction of milfoil and other weeds to North Lake is almost certain, a prevention and detection plan is essential. There are four main elements to the prevention and detection plan: a) Annual distribution of educational materials. Steering Committee members will compile published materials and generate literature specifically related to North Lake to distribute to all watershed residents each year at the beginning of the growing season. b) Annual aquatic plant identification workshops. Workshops each spring will cover native plants as well as noxious aquatic weeds. Samples of our target weeds will be collected and pressed in Year 1 as a permanent reference and education tool for the community. All watershed residents and lake-users will be invited and encouraged to attend. The lakefront residents at Lake Killarney, Lake Geneva and other nearby waterbodies might also be invited to expand the educational effort beyond North Lake. Aquatic plant experts could be invited from Ecology, the King County Noxious Weed Control Program, or other applicable agencies. A better-educated community of residents and lake-users will be more likely to identify and report noxious aquatic weeds and other potential problems. c) Two aquatic weed surveys each growing season. Volunteers (community members) will undergo training with lakes/aquatic plant specialists prior to conducting surveys. There are at least two certified divers living on the lake, both of whom have been active in developing the IAVMP and project proposal. Divers will be trained to survey the lake bottom to complement visual surveys from the surface and to take samples for identification. d) Boy Scout Troop 306 will be at the public boat launch on opening day of fishing to educate the public about the milfoil eradication efforts and what they can do as individuals to decrease the chances of reinfestation. They will also work on checking and cleaning boat trailers before they enter the water and after. 2. Lake Stewardship Education Program North Lake residents have a unique situation with having six families who rotate responsibility in the King County Lake Stewardship Program. While other lakes in King County may only have one or two volunteers for the lake stewardship program,North Lake has six families that volunteer. These families attend lake related workshops learning about nutrients in fertilizers, detergents, failing septic system, eroding soil, shoreline planting suggestions and resources, and how animal waste can cause algae and aquatic plants to grow and multiply. Another avenue to share information on appropriate shoreline plantings is our North Lake Garden Club. One of the goals of the steering committee is to develop a process to share this information with a broader audience of watershed residents. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 10 North Lake has a public boat launch on the northeast end of the lake. We understand that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has begun a pilot project to address the concerns of lake-users spreading noxious weeds from lake to lake. An additional goal of the steering committee is to learn and understand how the finding from this pilot can be incorporated in the health of our lake. The North Lake community is an inclusive and involved community. We have many opportunities to share lake quality information with our watershed residents. These opportunities include monthly North Lake Improvement Club board meetings that are open to all members, the annual meeting of the NLIC, Fourth of July parade and community get-together, holiday boat parade, annual community garage sale and as needed NLIC cleanup. Each of these functions offers the steering committee the avenue to provide lake-related information to all watershed residents and lake-users. Our overall goal is to develop a process to keep lake quality information current and available to all our watershed users. The Steering Committee has generated some ideas for signage related to the transport of milfoil by boats and trailers. If signs posted at the boat launch include step by step directions on how to properly clean boats and trailers, and why it is important, lake-users may be more apt to do the right thing. Obvious problems for boat cleaning involve questions of where it can be done and the right equipment to do the job. The boat launch at North Lake does not have any tools to perform this cleaning, which is similar to most other lakes in the area. Any adhering pollutants that are washed off by a diligent boat owner at the launch site will probably end up in the lake since there is no facility to collect the gray water. The Steering Committee has discussed the option of installing a Cleaning Station at the North Lake boat launch with a hose, handpump, and a catchment and drain to encourage the proper cleaning of boats and trailers. The handpump would hopefully discourage using the station for cleaning cars or other inappropriate uses. North Lake may pursue these issues with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, which has just begun a pilot program to address these concerns. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 11 WATERSHED AND WATERBODY CHARACTERISTICS North Lake's watershed is located in south-western King County, Washington in an unincorporated area located right outside the Federal Way city limits. State resource agencies frequently use a system of Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA)to refer to the state's major watershed basins.North Lake is located in WRIA 10, which refers to the Puyallup—White River combination watershed and includes the Puyallup and White Rivers and the southern part of King County. The North Lake watershed constitutes approximately 425 acres (2.2%) of the Hylebos Creek Sub- basin of the White—Puyallup River watershed. The Hylebos Creek Sub-basin is 19221 acres and receives a mean annual rainfall of 40 inches. The sub-basin drains approximately 18 mile from the cities of Federal Way to Commencement Bay in Pierce County and it encompasses 35 miles of stream and 250 acres of wetlands (FOHC 2004). According to the Soil Survey for King County Area, Washington, the soils around North Lake watershed are primarily made up of the Alderwood series (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1973). The primary soil types are the Alderwood gravelly sandy loam(AgQ and Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 6 % slopes (AgB). The soil is comprised of moderately to well drained soils that have a weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated substratum at a depth of 24 to 40 inches. These soils are on uplands and formed under conifers, in glacial deposits. Permeability is moderately rapid in the surface layer and subsoil and very slow in the substratum. Roots penetrate easily to the consolidated substratum where they tend to mat on the surface. Water moves on top of the substratum in winter and the available water capacity is low. Runoff is slow to medium and the hazard of erosion is slight to moderate. There is one small section of Norma sandy loam(No) in the southern part of the lake and Orcas peat (Or) in the north. The Hylebos Creek Sub-basin tributaries drain approximately 18 mit, including North Lake, Lake Killarney, and Lake Geneva. Commercial areas, single family and multifamily residences dominate the basin. North Lake is located in the upper part of the watershed by Federal Way, which is the most heavily urbanized area of the basin (King County 1991). There are now 54 lakeside homes, which indicates that single family high-density land use has continued to increase on the east side of the lake. Future land use plans include a single family, high density area stretching along the east side of the lake, east of 38th Ave South. Although not directly on the shoreline the drainage from the new development will be going into North Lake as well as increase the number of people who will use the public boat launch. The west side of the lake is located within the city limits of Federal Way, however, the property is owned by Weyerhaeuser and is not open to development. The property is approximately 52.3 acres of second growth forest that lines the whole east side of North Lake to Weyerhaeuser Way South. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 12 C3Watershed Boundary North Lake N Major Roads North w--North Lake Outlet Figure 1: North Lake Watershed and Tributary 0016 Tributary 0016 drains North Lake from its southern tip, and joins Tributary 0006, which drains Lake Killarney, a half mile south of Tributary 0016. Tributary 0016 enters Hylebos Creek, which continues southwest and enters Pierce County where it flows directly into Commencement Bay. There is a significant amount of shoreline that remains relatively undeveloped at North Lake, thanks to Weyerhaeuser preserving their land and not allowing for development on the west side of the lake. This undoubtedly limits the nonpoint source nutrients reaching the lake. This entire sub-basin benefits from the moderating effects of its many wetlands and lakes, which act as detention ponds to reduce runoff"pulses." However, as the number of nearshore houses has increased around North Lake, so has the clearing of buffering native vegetation along the shoreline to provide landscaping or to enhance lake access and views. Nonetheless, many of the residential properties have maintained a buffer strip, which helps to filter out nutrients and pollutants before they enter the lake, as well as providing habitat. The public boat launch area is the only point where a road actually reaches the water. 334th and 33rd Ave. South provide access to all of the homes on the lake and is set several hundred feet away from the water on the other side of the homes. The runoff from the road filters through the lakeside properties. Waterbody Characteristics North Lake is a 55-acre lake with a mean depth of 14 feet and a maximum depth of 34 feet, with an estimated lake volume of 770 acre-ft and 8930 ft. (1.69 mi.) of shoreline. There are no major surface inflows to North Lake, with outflow into an unnamed tributary into the outlet channel with a weir. There is public boat access to the lake provided by a boat launch owned by the Washington Department of Fish& Wildlife (WDFW) located on the northwest side of the lake. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 13 The sediments in North Lake are mainly loose and unconsolidated, with high silt. Some areas are flocculent, especially up at the north end. The majority of the residential parcels also have loose sediment away from the shoreline; some residents in the past have added gravel to shallow areas. Water Quality Since 1985, King County residents have participated in a volunteer monitoring program to create a long-term record of water quality for the region's small lakes. Volunteers from North Lake have contributed samples in the early 1980's, the mid 1990's, and then 2001 through 2004. (King County, 2001). Prior to this time, the former Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO)performed annual lake monitoring in the time periods 1979, 1980 and 1983. Lakes can be classified by measurements of potential and actual biological activity, also known as "trophic state." Lakes with high concentration of nutrients and algae, generally accompanied by low water transparencies, are termed eutrophic or highly productive. Lakes with low concentrations of nutrients and algae, most often accompanied by high transparencies, are categorized as oligotrophic or low in productivity. Lakes intermediate between eutrophic and oligotrophic are termed mesotrophic. A commonly used index of water quality for lakes is the Trophic State Index(TSI) originally developed by Robert Carlson(1977), which separates lakes into the three categories by scoring water clarity, and concentrations of both phosphorus and chlorophyll a, relating them to a scale based on phytoplankton biovolume. Lakes can be naturally eutrophic, mesotrophic, or oligotrophic based on the inherent character and stability of the surrounding watershed. Eutrophication or the increase in a lake's biological activity over time is a process that occurs naturally in some lakes and may be accelerated in other by human activities (King County 2003). North Lakes productivity is mesotrophic (moderate), characterized by moderate water clarity and chlorophyll a values, and low to moderate phosphorous levels. Data from the 16-year record from 1985 to 2000 are summarized in Table 1, taken from King County Lake Water Quality: A Trend Report on King County Small Lakes (November 200 1) Summary of water quality characteristics • water clarity(Secchi depth) ranged from 2.1 —4.1 meters (May-October average) • total phosphorous ranged from 9— 16 µg/L (May-October average) • Chlorophyll a ranged from 2.2—4.2 µg/L (May-October average), but most years were below 4.0 • TSI Secchi ranged from 40— 50 • TSI Chlorophyll a ranged from 38 —45 • TSI TP ranged from 36—44 • TSI annual average 38 —46 North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 14 Table l: Average Values for Select Trophic Parameters at North Lake Year No. of Secchi Ch1 a* TP* TSI* TSI* TSI* TSI* Samples (meter) (µg/L) (µg/L) Secchi Ch1 a TP Average 1985 8 4.1 2.2 9 40 38 36 38 1986 81 3.9 3.9 15 40 441 43 43 1987 8 3.2 3.2 13 43 42 42 42 1988 8 3.3 2.7 16 43 40 44 42 1989 9 2.7 2.3 13 45 39 41 42 1990 --- --- --- --- --- --- 1991 --- --- --- --- --- --- 1992 --- --- --- --- --- --- 1993 --- --- --- --- --- --- 1994 --- --- --- --- --- --- 1995 ill 3.8 3.3 15 41 42 43 42 1996 9 2.5 2.6 15 47 40 43 43 1997 9 2.1 4.2 16 50 45 44 46 1998 12 2.8 2.41 13 45 39 411 42 1999 --- --- --- --- --- --- 2000 ---I --- ---I ---I ---L --- *Ch1 a=chlorophyll a, TP--total phosphorus, and TSI=Trophic State Index While nine years of data could be used to analyze trends employing the non-parametric Mann- Kendall's test for trend, the existing pattern of missing data points made trend analysis inaccurate. Therefore, trend analyses were not completed for North Lake (King County, 2001). Fish and Wildlife Communities North Lake and its surrounding habitats support a variety of fish, birds, and animals by providing nesting, forage, and cover. According to Chad Jackson at the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), the lake is stocked on a yearly basis with rainbow trout. Other warm water fish are present in the lake and most likely are the following species: perch, large mouth bass, pumpkinseed, bullheads, sculpins, and suckers. Parts of the Hylebos Creek offer spawning and rearing habitat for salmonid species. Salmonids are unable to get up to North Lake because of full fish blockages along Hylebos Creek. Wendy Honey, a North Lake resident, spoke with the Department of Fish and Wildlife on August 4, 2004. It was mentioned that several times since 1950 North Lake was "rehabilitated"with Rotenone; it was put in the lake in 1950, 1954, 1963, 1968, 1972, and 1979. Rotenone is a piscicide that is used to remove undesirable fish from lakes and streams. It was likely used to manage North Lake to maintain populations of fish species popular for sport fishermen. Copies of the application records are in Appendix D of this document. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 15 The mixed forest and wetland plant communities around the lake provide non-breeding habitat for a few Puget Sound lowland amphibian species, such as the Pacific chorus frog (Psudacris regilla). The non-native bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) is also quite common the North Lake, and they can have a negative impact on our native amphibians through direct predations (Richter& Azous, 2001 a). Mammals expected to make use of the lake and adjacent forested areas include: opossum(didelphus marsupialis), bats such as the little brown bat (myotis lucifugus), Douglas squirrel (tamias doglasii), muskrat (ondatra zibethica), and raccoon (procyn lotor). River otter(Lutra canadensis) are considered a rare treat to observe. Beaver (Castor canadensis) and coyote (canis latrans) are potential visitors to the lake. Julie Cleary, a resident on North Lake, provided a bird list collected by her neighbor Beverly Rosenow. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 16 Table 2: Wildlife List Checklist of Birds Probable on North Lake In order by FAMILY Observed and Probable Birds in Bold Other Possible Birds in Italics LOON ❑ Common ❑ Common Loon SS Goldeneye KINGFISHER GREBES ❑ Barrow's ❑ Belted Goldeneye Kingfisher El Grebe El gufflehead El Homed Grebe SWALLOWS ❑ Hooded ❑ Purple Martin ❑ Western Grebe SC Merganser SC CORMORANT ❑ Common ❑ Tree Swallow ❑ Double-crested Merganser Cormorant El Red-breasted El Violet-green Merganser Swallow WADERS ❑ Northern ❑ Great Blue Heron ❑ Ruddy Duck Rough-winged KCS RAPTORS ❑ Cliff Swallow ❑ Green Heron ❑ Osprey KCS ❑ Barn Swallow WATERFOWL ❑ Bald Eagle ST, WRENS ❑ Trumpeter Swan FT RAILS El Marsh Wren El Greater White- WARBLERS fronted Goose ❑ Virginia Rail ❑ Snow Goose ❑ Sora ❑ Common Yellowthroat ❑ Canada Goose ❑ American Coot BLACKBIRDS ❑ Wood Duck SHOREBIRDS ❑ Red-winged ❑ Green-winged Teal ❑ Killdeer Blackbird ❑ Mallard ❑ Spotted ❑ Northern Pintail Sandpiper NOTES ❑ Blue-winged Teal ❑ Common Snipe SC = state candidate ❑ Cinnamon Teal ❑ Long-billed SS = state sensitive Dowitcher* ❑ Northern Shoveler GULLS ST = state threatened ❑ Eurasian Wigeon ❑ Mew Gull FT = federally ❑ American Wigeon threatened El Ring-billed ❑ Canvasback Gull KCS = King County Comprehensive Plan ❑ Redhead ❑ Glaucous- Shall be Protected ❑ Ring-necked Duck winged Gull Reported El Greater Scaup SWIFTS p ❑ Lesser Scaup ❑ Black Swift ❑ Vaux's Swift SC North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 17 Beneficial and Recreational Uses North Lake and its surroundings support a variety of uses to humans. Recreational activities include swimming, fishing, boating (no combustion motors), bird watching, and wildlife viewing. Residents access the lake for these activities from any of the small private docks around the lake associated with the residential parcels. A public boat launch maintained by Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife allows everybody to benefit from this beautiful resource as well. Internal combustion engines are not allowed on the lake (KCC 12.44.330), consequently there are no activities such as water skiing or jet skiing. One consequence of this ban is that the natural character and integrity of the system have been preserved. Also, the system is spared potential pollution from petroleum releases and noise pollution. There is also no hunting allowed on North Lake. kSt 3# :a �l I Property Owners State of Washington Weyerhaeuser Residential Figure 2: North Lake Land Use North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 18 Characterization of Aquatic Plants in North Lake The most recent comprehensive aquatic plant survey of North Lake occurred on July 26, 1995 as part of a plant-mapping project on 36 lakes carried out by King County's Lake Stewardship Program (King County, 1996). The surveys were conducted by boat using a two-person crew plus a volunteer (or volunteers)when available. Surveyors used GPS to establish shoreline sections between two fixed points. Each shoreline section was characterized by community type, species present, percent cover of community type, and relative species density within a community type. Community types were defined as emergent, floating, or submergent North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 19 North � section 7 Aquatic Plants Map Floating --- Emergent -- i Submergent No plants or sparse section 6 No plants—deep * Loosestrife �. Shoreline Section boundary n Section 5- n: Section 1 Section 4 y t?j Section 2 r. Lake Area: 57.4 acres Mean Depth: 14 feet Maximum Depth: 34 feet a Section 3 I � � 0 100 200 400 feet F-- Seple-6e 1996 Aquatic Plant Mapping far Thirty-rix King County Laker Page 71 Figure 3: Aquatic Plant Map North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 20 Nineteen plant species were identified at North Lake, including eight emergent types, three floating types, and eight submergent types. Emergents are plants that are rooted in the sediment at the water's edge but have stems and leaves which grow above the water surface. Floating rooted plants are rooted in the sediment and send leaves to the water's surface. Submergent plants are either freely-floating or are rooted in the lake bottom but grow within the water column. The floating plant coverage totaled 14.4 acres, while the submergent community comprised 20.7 acres. Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) could be found along the entire shoreline. In 2002, two consulting firms AquaTechnex and Envirovision Corporation produced a Regional Eurasian Milfoil Control Plan for King County in 2002. At this time,North Lake was not documented to have Eurasian water milfoil. On May 4, 2004, King County Lake Stewardship staff and a member of the King County Noxious Weed Group conducted a preliminary snorkel survey, characterizing the milfoil infestation of the lake. The survey was conducted with one person in the boat taking notes and two snorkelers surveying the entire littoral zone. The catalyst for this survey was complaints from the North Lake community that non-native waterlilies and Eurasian watermilfoil were increasing in density. On the survey several fragments of milfoil were found in the lake and a few scattered rooted milfoil plants. The majority of the infestation was found at the boat launch on the north end of the lake. Waterlilies were documented in covering the majority of the littoral zone and spreading into the middle of the lake. Lythrum salicaria is now common in buffer shoreline vegetation; populations and distribution of L. salicaria have been partially contained by community efforts to stop seed production through manual control efforts. The plant has obviously continued to increase over the years despite these recent control efforts. The Washington Natural Heritage Program(WNHP)performed a search of their Natural Heritage Information System database for rare plant species, select rare animal species, and high quality wetland and terrestrial ecosystems in the vicinity of North Lake (http://www.wa.gov/dnr/htdocs/fr/nhp/wanhp.html). This search did not find any endangered, threatened, or sensitive plant species recorded for North Lake,nor did it find the presence of any animal species tracked by their system. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 21 v � o qw A g A o r w w w w r w o c o g q © g n q A g A q A - A ® CO r / � LL = w w w w § s = w r-- o w L /wrl_ o ƒ CD LO a o ( a t ® a w ■ 7 (0 � « � + � � LO � � o Ili � Ili � © § ƒ + / 04 � � � + � G � u § § N 04 � 0 � A A $ -7 � � � / ƒ c Q > s s = s s s s s CD E § E e E = o e E E E § § E E e o e o E 9 b E E \ E \ E E E \ \ \ E E \ \ E E E E \ \ E ) m 2 m 2 2 2 m m m m m L L L L m p E U \ c � _ o = = s e : e $ _ } & 7 2 7 2 / 7 ? � \ \ k k 2 3 f = o c E e \ G _ _ _ _ _ b a) § \ L ƒ \ / \ \ / / ./ / % = ( e E k § 2 \ 2 R 2 _ % ° 5 � / p e a e 2 k g ° ® \ g 2 \ = m g 0 � \ \ \ 4 } » e I _ I ) ƒ \ / k / m F 2 % w \ ƒ ± 2 2 2 a- ƒ a_ $ /cl @ / / cl / � « C .§ / 9 \ f ) g am J 5 s 7 - % ■ _ _ c @ » y % e = (D f 3 _ @ = g = a g = J £ e e £ � f § 2 2 E \ \ \ \ \ m U 9 \ / < t = .y e = e 5 = e _ a = e = . = E @ _ § 2 � � = m @ $ _ _ = s 3 @ a / ® § e \ o e m E _ § 5 = e 2 ƒ / = e 5 ® m \ / \ $ D- 2 0 2 \ � k f e / o \ � s 2 ± _ - o o e m » 3 2 ) L \ .27 & 2 Z \ EEf U) @2 # I L - _j Z 3 \ I 2 ° / \ k o - ± a u f / Noxious Aquatic Weeds in North Lake The term"noxious weed"refers to those non-native plants that are legally defined by Washington's Noxious Weed Control Law (RCW 17.10) as highly destructive, competitive, or difficult to control once established. Noxious weeds have usually been introduced accidentally as a contaminant, or as ornamentals. Non-native plants often do not have natural predators (i.e. herbivores, pathogens) or strong competitors to control their numbers as they may have had in their home range. WAC 16.750 sets out three classes (A, B, C) of noxious weeds based on their distribution in the state, each class having different control requirements. County Weed Boards are given some discretion as to setting control priorities for Class B and C weeds. Table 2 shows the 19 species found in the 1995 plant survey, including three listed noxious weed species: Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata), and yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus). In 1995 Eurasian watermilfoil was not detected in the lake. However, in the winter of 2004 North Lake residents discovered milfoil and upon surveying King County confirmed milfoil has been introduced into the lake. Purple loosestrife, fragrant waterlily, yellow flag iris and Eurasian water milfoil will be the focus of the plant management efforts on North Lake. Purple loosestrife and milfoil are Class B Noxious weeds; Class B are required by law to be controlled and contained. Fragrant waterlily and yellow flag iris are Class C Noxious Weeds; Class C weeds are generally not required by law to be controlled and contained, but counties may designate a Class C weed for control in their county or in certain areas of their county. Neither yellow flag iris nor fragrant waterlily are required to be controlled in King County. Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) Eurasian watermilfoil is native to Europe, Asia, and North Africa and also occurs in Greenland (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board, 1995). The oldest record of Eurasian watermilfoil in Washington is from a 1965 herbarium specimen collected from Lake Meridian, King County. It was first identified causing problems in the 1970s in Lake Washington and proceeded to move down the I-5 corridor, probably transported to new lakes on boats and trailers. Eurasian watermilfoil is among the worst aquatic pests in North America. M. spicatum is a submersed, perennial aquatic plant with feather-like leaves. It usually has 12 to 16 leaflets (usually more than 14) on each leaf arranged in whorls of 4 around the stem. Leaves near the surface may be reddish or brown. Sometimes there are emergent flower stalks during the summers that have tiny emergent leaves. In western Washington, Eurasian watermilfoil frequently over-winters in an evergreen form and may maintain considerable winter biomass (K. Hamel, pers. comm.). This plant forms dense mats of vegetation just below the water's surface. In the late summer and fall, the plants break into fragments with attached roots that float with the currents, infesting new areas. Disturbed plants will also fragment at other times of the year. A new plant can start from a tiny piece of a milfoil plant. M. spicatum was not previously thought to reproduce from seed in this region. However, aquatic plant experts are beginning to think that milfoil seeds might be playing a bigger role in repopulating lakes than was previously hoped(K. Hamel,pers. comm.). This is especially true if the lake dewaters. Milfoil starts spring growth earlier than native aquatic plants, and thereby gets a"head start" on other plants. Eurasian watermilfoil can degrade the ecological integrity of a water body in just a few growing seasons. Dense stands of milfoil crowd out native aquatic vegetation, which in turn alters predator-prey relationships among fish and other aquatic animals. Eurasian watermilfoil can also reduce dissolved North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 23 oxygen—first by inhibiting water mixing in areas where it grows, and then as oxygen is consumed by bacteria during decomposition of dead plant material. Decomposition of M. spicatum also releases phosphorus and nitrogen to the water that could increase algal growth. Further, dense mats of Eurasian watermilfoil can increase water temperature by absorbing sunlight, raise the pH, and create stagnant water mosquito breeding areas. Eurasian watermilfoil will negatively affect recreational activities such as swimming, fishing, and boating. The dense beds of vegetation make swimming dangerous, snag fish hooks on every cast, and inhibit boating by entangling propellers or paddles and slowing the movement of boats across the water. At North Lake,M. spicatum is moderate to light in density. The infestation is still patchy with only a few high-density milfoil stands. As of 2004, most of the patches are still moderate to low density, and therefore are not yet causing enormous impacts. It is likely that the milfoil infestation will continue to expand if left untreated, dramatically increasing negative impacts to the beneficial uses of North Lake. Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) Purple loosestrife is native to Europe and Asia and was introduced through ship ballast water to the Atlantic Coast in the mid-1800s (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board, 1997). In Washington, purple loosestrife was first collected from the Seattle area in 1929 from Lake Washington. Purple loosestrife is a perennial that can reach 9 feet tall with long spikes of magenta flowers. The flowers usually have 6 petals, and the stems are squared-off Purple loosestrife is considered a facultative wetland(+) species (FACW+), with a 67-99%probability of occurring in wetlands as opposed to upland areas (Reed, 1988). Vigorous plants can produce over 2 million tiny, lightweight seeds (120,000 per spike)that are easily spread by waterfowl and other animals (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board, 1997). Although a prolific seeder, purple loosestrife can also spread through vegetative production by shoots and rhizomes as well as by root fragmentation. It has a woody taproot with a fibrous root system that forms a dense mat, keeping other plants from establishing in a space. Purple loosestrife has colonized the shoreline of North Lake. This plant disrupts wetland ecosystems by displacing native or beneficial plants and animals. Waterfowl, fur-bearing animals, and birds vacate wetland habitat when native vegetation is displaced by purple loosestrife. Loss of native vegetation results in decreased sources of food, nesting material, and shelter. Economic impacts are high in agricultural communities when irrigation systems are clogged or when wet pastures are unavailable for grazing. Purple loosestrife is aggressive and competitive, taking full advantage of disturbance to natural wetland vegetation caused by anthropogenic alterations of the landscape. Seed banks build for years since seeds may remain viable for up to 3 years. Monospecific stands are long- lived in North America as compared to European stands, illustrating the competitive edge loosestrife has over other plant species. The Purple loosestrife on North Lake will need a combined approach to achieve adequate control. In August 2002, approximately 200-300 beetles (Galerucella calmariensis)were released at the North Lake boat launch and in July 2003, approximately 400-500 beetles were released at the boat launch. No beetles have been released in 2004. It typically takes about five years to see any control from the beetles, so the lack of visible beetle damage at this point is not unexpected(M. Walker, pers. comm.). However, the beetles will not be sufficient in and of themselves. A portion of the lake is often shaded and the beetles need sun to thrive. An integrated approach to controlling the purple loosestrife on North Lake would be the most beneficial. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 24 Fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata) This species is native to the eastern half of North America (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board, 2001b). It was probably introduced into Washington during the Alaska Pacific Yukon Exposition in Seattle in the late 1800's. It has often been introduced to ponds and lakes because of its beautiful, large white or pink(occasionally light yellow),many-petaled flowers that float on the water's surface, surrounded by large, round green leaves. The leaves are attached to flexible underwater stalks rising from thick fleshy rhizomes. Adventitious roots attach the horizontal creeping and branching rhizomes. This aquatic perennial herb spreads aggressively,rooting in murky or silty sediments in water up to 7 feet deep. It prefers quiet waters such as ponds, lake margins and slow streams and will grow in a wide range of pH. Shallow lakes are particularly vulnerable to being totally covered by fragrant waterlilies. Waterlily spreads by seeds and by rhizome fragments. A planted rhizome will cover about a 15-foot diameter circle in five years (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board, 2001b). Fragrant waterlily(Nymphaea odorata) is quickly expanding its distribution on North Lake (W. Honey, pers. comm.). When uncontrolled, this species tends to form dense monospecific stands that can persist until senescence in the fall. Mats of these floating leaves prevent wind mixing and extensive areas of low oxygen can develop under the waterlily beds in the summer. Waterlilies can restrict lakefront access and hinder swimming, boating, and other recreational activity. They may also limit our native waterlily(Nuphar luteum) with which it overlaps in distribution. The fragrant waterlily is still expanding in patches on North Lake, and so its future impacts are not clear. Some patches have connected, limiting recreational activities such as boating, fishing, and swimming. Even canoes can have great difficulty moving across dense floating mats of fragrant waterlily, not to mention entanglement with propellers of boat motors. Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) Yellow flag iris is native to mainland Europe, the British Isles, and the Mediterranean region of North Africa(Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board, 2001a). This plant was introduced widely as a garden ornamental. It has also been used for erosion control. The earliest collection in Washington is from Lake McMurray in Skagit County in 1948 (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board, 2001 a). The yellow flowers are a distinguishing characteristic, but when not flowering it may be confused with cattail (Typha sp.) or broad-fruited bur-reed (Sparganium eurycarpum). Yellow flag iris is considered an obligate wetland species (OBL), with a>99%probability of occurring in wetlands as opposed to upland areas (Reed, 1988). The plants produce large fruit capsules and corky seeds in the late summer. Yellow flag iris spreads by rhizomes and seeds. Up to several hundred flowering plants may be connected rhizomatously. Rhizome fragments can form new plants. Yellow flag iris can spread by rhizome growth to form dense stands that can exclude even the toughest of our native wetland species, such as cattail (Typha latifolia). This noxious weed has already colonized the shoreline of North Lake. In addition to threatening to lower plant diversity, this noxious weed can also alter hydrologic dynamics through sediment accretion along the shoreline. This species produces prolific seed that could easily be transported downstream to invade this valuable resource area. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 25 AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL ALTERNATIVES This section outlines common methods used to control aquatic weeds. Much of the information in this section is quoted directly from the Ecology's website: htlp://www.ecy.wa.govL/programs/wg/�lants/management/index.html Additional information is derived from the field experience of the King County Noxious Weed Control Program, in particular from Drew Kerr, Aquatic Noxious Weed Specialist and WSDA licensed aquatic herbicide applicator. Recommendations found in the 2001 draft version of the "King County Regional Milfoil Plan"have also been taken into consideration. Control/eradication methods discussed herein include Aquatic Herbicide, Manual Methods, Bottom Screens, Diver Dredging, Biological Control, Rotovation, Cutting, Harvesting, and Drawdown. Aquatic Herbicides Description of Method hqp://www.ecy.wa. _gov/programs/wq//lants/management/aqua028.html Aquatic herbicides are chemicals specifically formulated for use in water to eradicate or control aquatic plants. Herbicides approved for aquatic use by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)have been reviewed and considered compatible with the aquatic environment when used according to label directions. However, individual states may also impose additional constraints on their use. Aquatic herbicides are sprayed directly onto floating or emergent aquatic plants, or are applied to the water in either a liquid or pellet form. Systemic herbicides are capable of killing the entire plant by translocating from foliage or stems and killing the root. Contact herbicides cause the parts of the plant in contact with the herbicide to die back, leaving the roots alive and capable of re-growth(chemical mowing). Non-selective herbicides will generally affect all plants that they come in contact with, both monocots and dicots. Selective herbicides will affect only some plants (usually dicots—broad leafed plants like Eurasian watermilfoil will be affected by selective herbicides whereas monocots like Brazilian elodea and our native pondweeds may not be affected). Because of environmental risks from improper application, aquatic herbicide use in Washington State waters is regulated and has certain restrictions. The Washington State Department of Agriculture must license aquatic applicators. In addition, because of a March 2001 court decision(Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals), coverage under a discharge permit called a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit must be obtained before aquatic herbicides can be applied to some waters of the U.S. This ruling, referred to as the Talent Irrigation District decision, has further defined Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. Ecology has developed a general NPDES permit which is available for coverage under the Washington Department of Agriculture for the management of noxious weeds growing in an aquatic situation and a separate general permit for nuisance aquatic weeds (native plants) and algae control. For nuisance weeds (native species also referred to as beneficial vegetation) and algae, applicators and the local sponsor of the project must obtain a North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 26 NPDES permit from the Washington Department of Ecology before applying herbicides to Washington water bodies. Although there are a number of EPA registered aquatic herbicides, the Department of Ecology currently issues permits for seven aquatic herbicides (as of 2004 treatment season). Several other herbicides are undergoing review and it is likely that other chemicals may be approved for use in Washington in the future. As an example, Renovate® (Triclopyr)has been approved by the U.S. EPA for aquatic use in November 2002, making it the first aquatic herbicide to receive registration since 1988. Renovate® was designed to be effective on both emergent and submersed plants. The chemicals that are currently permitted for use in 2004 are: Aquatic Herbicides (see Appendix for herbicide labels) • Glyphosate - (Trade names for aquatic products with glyphosate as the active ingredient include Rodeo®, AquaMaster, and AquaProo). This systemic broad-spectrum herbicide is used to control floating-leaved plants like waterlilies and shoreline plants like purple loosestrife. It is generally applied as a liquid to the leaves. Glyphosate does not work on underwater plants such as Eurasian watermilfoil or hydrilla. Although glyphosate is a broad spectrum, non-selective herbicide, a good applicator can somewhat selectively remove targeted plants by focusing the spray only on the plants to be removed. Plants can take several weeks to die and a repeat application is often necessary to remove plants that were missed during the first application. • Fluridone - (Trade names for fluridone products include: Sonar and Avast!®). Fluridone is a slow-acting systemic herbicide used to control Eurasian watermilfoil, hydrilla and other underwater plants. It may be applied as a pellet or as a liquid. Fluridone can show good control of submersed plants where there is little water movement and an extended time for the treatment. Its use is most applicable to whole-lake or isolated bay treatments where dilution can be minimized. It is not considered effective for spot treatments of areas less than five acres. It is slow acting and may take six to twelve weeks before the dying plants fall to the sediment and decompose. When used to manage Eurasian watermilfoil in Washington, fluridone is applied several times during the spring/summer to maintain a low, but consistent concentration in the water. Although fluridone is considered to be a broad-spectrum herbicide, when used at very low concentrations, it can be used to selectively remove Eurasian watermilfoil. Some native aquatic plants, especially pondweeds, are minimally affected by low concentrations of fluridone. • 2,4-D-There are two formulations of 2,4-D approved for aquatic use. The granular formulation contains the low-volatile butoxy-ethyl-ester(BEE) formulation of 2,4-D (Trade names include: AquaKleen and Navigate®). The liquid formulation contains the dimethylamine salt (DMA)of 2,4-D (Trade name - DMA*4IVM). 2,4-D is a relatively fast-acting, systemic, selective herbicide used for the control of Eurasian watermilfoil and other broad-leaved species. Both the granular and liquid formulations can be effective for spot treatment of Eurasian watermilfoil. 2,4-D has been shown to be selective to Eurasian watermilfoil when used at the labeled rate, leaving native aquatic species relatively unaffected. However, 2,4-D is not effective against hydrilla. • Endothall-Dipotassium Salt - (Trade name Aquathol®) Endothall is a fast-acting non- selective contact herbicide, which destroys the vegetative part of the plant but generally does not kill the roots. Endothall may be applied in a granular or liquid form. Typically endothall compounds are used primarily for short-term(one season) control of a variety of aquatic plants, North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 27 including hydrilla. However, there has been some recent research that indicates that when used in low concentrations, endothall can be used to selectively remove exotic weeds; leaving some native species unaffected. Because it is fast acting, endothall can be used to treat smaller areas effectively. Endothall is not effective in controlling American waterweed(Elodea canadensis) or Brazilian elodea (Egeria densa). • Diquat—(Trade name Reward"). Diquat is a fast-acting non-selective contact herbicide that destroys the vegetative part of the plant but does not kill the roots. It is applied as a liquid. Typically diquat is used primarily for short-term(one season) control of a variety of submersed aquatic plants. It is very fast acting and is suitable for spot treatment. However, turbid water or dense algal blooms can interfere with its effectiveness. Diquat was allowed for use in Washington in 2003 and Ecology will be collecting information about its efficacy against Brazilian elodea in 2003. It is effective in controlling hydrilla. • Triclopyr- (Trade name Renovate3®). There are two formulations of triclopyr. It is the triethylamine salt (TEA) formation of triclopyr that is registered for use in aquatic or riparian environments. Triclopyr, applied as a liquid, is a relatively fast-acting, systemic, selective herbicide used for the control of Eurasian watermilfoil and other broad-leaved species such as purple loosestrife. Triclopyr can be effective for spot treatment of Eurasian watermilfoil and is relatively selective to Eurasian watermilfoil when used at the labeled rate. Many native aquatic species are unaffected by triclopyr. Triclopyr is very useful for purple loosestrife control since native grasses and sedges are unaffected by this herbicide. When applied directly to water, Ecology has imposed a 12-hour swimming restriction to minimize eye irritation. Triclopyr received its aquatic registration from EPA in 2003 and was allowed for use in Washington in 2004. • Imazapyr - (Trade name Habitat"). This systemic broad spectrum herbicide, applied as a liquid, is used to control emergent plants like spartina, reed canarygrass, and phragmites and floating- leaved plants like waterlilies. Imazapyr does not work on underwater plants such as Eurasian watermilfoil. Although imazapyr is a broad spectrum, non-selective herbicide, a good applicator can somewhat selectively remove targeted plants by focusing the spray only on the plants to be removed. Imazapyr was allowed for use in Washington in 2004. Advantages • Aquatic herbicide application can be less expensive than other aquatic plant control methods. • Aquatic herbicides are easily applied around docks and underwater obstructions. • 2,4-D DMA, 2,4-D BEE, and Triclopyr TEA have been shown to be effective in controlling smaller infestations (not lake-wide) of Eurasian watermilfoil in Washington, and could also be used on the purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. • Washington has had some success in eradicating Eurasian watermilfoil from some smaller lakes (320 acres or less)using Sonar. • Glyphosate is the recommended chemical for fragrant waterlily control. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 28 Disadvantages • Some herbicides have swimming, drinking, fishing, irrigation, and water use restrictions. • Herbicide use may have unwanted impacts to people who use the water and to the environment. • Non-targeted plants as well as nuisance plants may be controlled or killed by some herbicides. • Depending on the herbicide used, it may take several days to weeks or several treatments during a growing season before the herbicide controls or kills treated plants. • Rapid-acting herbicides like Aquathol®may cause low oxygen conditions to develop as plants decompose. Low oxygen can cause fish kills. • To be most effective, generally herbicides must be applied to rapidly growing plants. • Some expertise in using herbicides is necessary in order to be successful and to avoid unwanted impacts. • Many people have strong feelings against using chemicals in water. • Some cities or counties may have policies forbidding or discouraging the use of aquatic herbicides. Permits A NPDES permit is needed. Both the noxious and nuisance NPDES permits require the development of Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plans (IAVMP)by the third year of chemical control work. The requirement of monitoring of herbicide levels started in 2003, whether the chemical has been applied directly to the water or along the shoreline where it may have gotten into the adjacent surface water. For noxious weed control, the applicator must apply to the Washington Department of Agriculture (Agriculture) for coverage under their NPDES permit each treatment season. There is no permit or application fee to obtain NPDES coverage under Agriculture's permit for Noxious Weeds. Since North Lake is in unincorporated King County, the King County Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES)will require a permit for application of herbicide in Sensitive Areas to submergent, floating and emergent aquatic plants. This falls under their Clearing and Grading Permit. A Shoreline Exemption Permit will also be required by DDES. Costs Approximate costs for one-acre herbicide treatment(costs will vary from site to site): • Glyphosate: $250 • Fluridone: $900 to $1,000 • EndothalL $650 North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 29 • 2,4-D: $600 • Diquat: $300 to $400 • Triclopyr: $1,000 Other Considerations The focus of the discussion below are the active ingredients 2,4-D, Triclopyr and Glyphosate since the Steering Committee, with input from the watershed-wide public meetings, have chosen these chemicals as the best options for the start of the Integrated Treatment Strategy for North Lake. Since fluridone (Sonar®)would have required a whole lake treatment and is very expensive per unit, it was not chosen as a viable option and is not discussed in further detail. Although not the preferred method of control, 2,4-D has been an effective tool in the past in Washington lakes and will be looked at as an alternative in North Lakes integrated approach. EPA studies yield the parameters LD50 (acute lethal dose to 50% of a test population),NOEL (No Observable Effect Level, which is the highest test dosage causing no adverse responses), and RfD (EPA Reference Dose determined by applying at least a 100-fold uncertainty factor to the NOEL). The EPA defines the RfD as the level that a human could be exposed to daily with reasonable certainty of no adverse effect from any cause, in other words, a "safe" dose. Exposures to bystanders or consumers are deemed safe when the RfD is not exceeded (Felsot, 1998). Since all substances, natural or manmade, may prove toxic at a sufficiently high dose, one should remember the old adage "dose makes the poison." The LD50 value is useful for comparing one compound with another and for grouping compounds into general hazard classes. According to Felsot(1998), any pesticide, such as triclopyr, glyphosate or 2,4-D that does not produce adverse effects on aquatic organisms until levels in water reach milligram per liter(i.e., mg/L, equivalent to a part per million, ppm)would be considered of comparatively low hazard. Substances that are biologically active in water at levels one-thousand-fold less, (i.e., gg/L, parts per billion,ppb), are considered highly hazardous to aquatic life. Most pesticides falling in the latter category are insecticides rather than herbicides. Also, compounds that have half-lives less than 100 days are considered non-persistent compared to compounds having half-lives approaching one year or longer(for example, DDT). The half-life of triclopyr in water ranges from one day to seven days, while 2,4-D is about 7 days in water and glyphosate is about 12 days in water. Since there are multiple factors that modulate the pesticides' hazard,just focusing on the half-life itself can be misleading for hazard assessment. It is now known that the longer a residue remains in soil/sediment, the less likely it will be taken up by plants, leach, or runoff(Felsot, 1998). This phenomenon is called residue aging and involves changes in the forces governing interactions of the chemical with the soil matrix over time. Triclopyr There are minimal restrictions for aquatic triclopyr applications. Washington State Department of Ecology has issued a 12-hour restriction on swimming to minimize the potential for eye irritation. There is a 120-day restriction on using water treated with triclopyr for irrigation on sensitive plants such as grapes and tomatoes. The alternative to waiting for 120 days is treated water can be used once it is determined that the water has reached a non-detectable level by laboratory analysis. There is no restriction for using treated water on established grasses. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 30 Animal health Sensitive and environmentally relevant species such as the various salmon species have demonstrated LC50S that range between 96 and 182 ppm acid equivalent(a.e.). These toxicity values place triclopyr TEA in the US EPA's ecotoxicological categories of slightly toxic (LC50 =>10 to 100 ppm)to practically non-toxic (LC50=>100ppm). There have been no verified cases of toxicity to fish when triclopyr is used at the maximum use rate of 2.5 ppm a.e. In the field where triclopyr TEA was used to control Eurasian watermilfoil, waterhyacinth, or purple loosestrife, no invertebrate mortality or changes in invertebrate population structure was seen that could be attributed to the uses of triclopyr TEA. Triclopyr acid is slightly toxic to birds when orally dosed or consumed in the diet. The triethylamine salt is slightly toxic to practically non-toxic when orally dosed or consumed in the diet. Reproduction of birds may be affected at levels greater than 100 ppm(Washington Department of Ecology, 2004). Triclopyr TEA appears to be safe for use in aquatic ecosystems. When expected environmental concentrations (EEC) of triclopyr are compared with laboratory LC50s, the highest concentration that may be encountered immediately after application(2.5 ppm a.e. for control of submerged weeds or 4.4 ppm a.e. for control of floating and emerged weeds in shallow water) may affect more sensitive species. However, fish and non-mollusk species would not be harmed by these concentrations. The most sensitive fish species is rainbow trout with a 96-hour LC50 of 82 ppm a.e. and the most sensitive non-mollusk invertebrate is the red swamp crayfish with a 96-hour LC50of>103 ppm a.e. Exposure to terrestrial wildlife occurs through two common routes, drinking water treated with triclopyr and eating aquatic plants, fish, or other aquatic organisms from the treatment site. Based on acute and chronic studies, triclopyr and its products used as aquatic herbicides do not pose a significant acute or chronic risk to terrestrial mammals (WDOE, 2004). Human health The Reference Dose (RfD), the amount of triclopyr residuals that could be consumed daily over a lifetime without adverse effects, was established at 0.05g mg/kg/day, based on the two generation reproduction toxicity study in rats with a no observed effect level (NOEL) of 5.0 mg/kg/day, the lowest dose tested. Concentrations of triclopyr in sites with short half-lives will typically fall below the temporary drinking water tolerance within one to three days of application (WDOE, 2004). The only health concerns for swimming are minor eye irritation and exposure to children immediately after application. Due to dilution, the chances of overexposure are limited; a mandatory waiting time after application before swimming is allowed. Exposure and risk calculations were determined for hypothetical situations involving ingestion and dermal contact with treated water while swimming and drinking potable water. Calculation of the exposures utilized the swimmer's weight, the skin surface area available for exposure, the amount of time spent in the treated water containing 2.5 and 0.5 ppm triclopyr, amount of water swallowed while swimming over specific time periods, and the estimated human skin permeability coefficient. Risk analyses were completed for various populations. The most sensitive population was found to be children who swim for three hours and ingest water while swimming. A child would have to ingest 3.5 gallons of lake water where triclopyr had been recently applied to cause risk factors to be exceeded. Based on specifications on the label and the results of triclopyr toxicity studies, the aggregate or combined daily exposure to the chemical does not pose an adverse health concern. The Washington Department of Health(WDOH) has recommended a 12-hour restriction for reentry into treated water to assure that eye irritation North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 31 potential and any other adverse effects will not occur. WDOH also recommends that those wanting to avoid all exposures can wait one to two weeks following application when the triclopyr residues have dissipated from the water and sediments (WDOE 2004). 2,4-D As far as restrictions for aquatic 2,4-D applications, there is no fishing restriction, and three to five days after treatment the water is generally below the drinking water standard(70ppb, irrigation standard is 100ppb for broad-leafed plants). Although 2,4-D should not damage grass or other monocots, it is not recommended that one use treated water to water lawns during this first three to five days since over-spray will kill ornamentals or plants such as tomatoes and grapes that are very sensitive to 2,4-D. There is no swimming restriction for 2,4-D use. Ecology advises that swimmers wait for 24 hours after application before swimming in the treatment area, but that is an advisory only. The choice is up to the individual. Human and general mammalian health The oral LD50 for 2,4-D (acid) is 764 mg/kg and the dermal LD50 is >2000 mg/kg. This chemical has a low acute toxicity(from an LD50 standpoint, is less toxic than caffeine and slightly more toxic than aspirin). The RfD for 2,4-D (acid) is 0.01 mg/kg/d. Recent, state-of-the-art EPA studies continue to find that it is not considered a carcinogen or mutagen, nor does it cause birth defects. It has a relatively short persistence in water, since it tends to bind to organic matter in the sediments. The herbicide 2,4-D generally does not bioaccumulate to a great extent, and the small amounts which do accumulate are rapidly eliminated once exposure ceases (Washington State Department of Ecology, 2001b). The risks to human health from exposure to aquatic 2,4-D applications were evaluated in terms of the most likely forms of contact between humans and the water to which the herbicide was applied. Ecology's Risk Assessment results indicate that 2,4-D should present little or no risk to the public from acute (one time) exposures via dermal contact with the sediment, dermal contact with water (swimming), or ingestion of fish(Washington State Department of Ecology, 2001b). Based on the low dermal absorption of the chemical, the dose of 2,4-D received from skin contact with treated water is not considered significant. Dose levels used in studies are often far beyond what an animal or human would experience as a result of an aquatic application. Many experiments have examined the potential for contact by the herbicide applicator, although these concentrations have little relevance to environmental exposure by those not directly involved with the herbicide application. Once the herbicide has entered the water, its concentration will quickly decline because of turbulence associated mixing and dilution, volatilization, and degradation by sunlight and secondarily by microorganisms (Felsot, 1998). Results of chronic exposure assessments indicate that human health should not be adversely impacted by chronic 2,4-D exposure via ingestion of fish, ingestion of surface water while swimming, incidental ingestion of sediments, dermal contact with sediments, or dermal contact with water (Washington State Department of Ecology, 2001b). Pharmacokinetic investigations have demonstrated that 2,4-D is rapidly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract and is quickly excreted. Animal toxicological investigations carried out at high doses showed a reduction in the ability of the kidneys to excrete the chemical, and resulted in some systemic toxicity. However, the high doses tested may not be relevant to the typical low dose human exposures resulting from labeled use. A review of the scientific and medical literature failed to provide any human case reports of systemic North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 32 toxicity or poisoning following overexposure to these herbicide products when used according to label instructions (Washington State Department of Ecology, 2001b). The risks to mammalian pets and wildlife should be closely related to these reported human risks, especially since many of the toxicity experiments are carried out on test animals by necessity. The potential hazard to pregnant women and to the reproductive health of both men and women was evaluated. The results of the 2,4-D developmental or teratology (birth defects) and multigenerational reproduction studies indicate that the chemical is not considered to be a reproductive hazard or cause birth defects (teratogen) when administered below maternally toxic doses (Washington State Department of Ecology, 2001b). A review of the histopathological sections of various 2,4-D subchronic and chronic studies provides further support that the chemical does not affect the reproductive organs, except in some higher dose groups beyond the potential level of incidental exposure after an aquatic weed application. Fish health Based on laboratory data reported in the Department of Ecology's Risk Assessment of 2,4-D, 2,4-D DMA has a low acute toxicity to fish(LC50>_100 to 524 mg a.i./L for the rainbow trout and bluegill sunfish respectively). No Federally sensitive, threatened or endangered species were tested with 2,4- D DMA. However, it is likely that endangered salmonids would not exhibit higher toxic effects to 2,4-D DMA than those seen in rainbow trout. Since the maximum use rate of 2,4-D DMA would be no higher than the maximum labeled use rate (4.8 mg a.i./L) even the most sensitive fish species within the biota should not suffer adverse impacts from the effects of 2,4-D DMA. In conclusion, 2,4- D DMA will not effect fish or free-swimming invertebrate biota acutely or chronically when applied at typical use rates of 1.36 to 4.8 mg a.i./L (Washington State Dept. of Ecology, 2001b). However, more sensitive species of benthic invertebrates like glass shrimp may be affected by 2,4-D DMA, but 80 and 90% of the benthic species should be safe when exposed to 2,4-D DMA acutely or chronically at rates recommended on the label. Field work indicates that 2,4-D has no significant adverse impacts on fish, free-swimming invertebrates and benthic invertebrates, but well designed field studies are in short supply. According to the Department of Ecology's Risk Assessment of 2,4-D, in the United States, 2,4-D BEE is the most common herbicide used to control aquatic weeds. 2,4-D BEE, has a high laboratory acute toxicity to fish(LC50= 0.3 to 5.6 mg a.i./L for rainbow trout fry and fathead minnow fingerlings, respectively). Formal risk assessment indicates that short-term exposure to 2,4-D BEE should cause adverse impact to fish since the risk quotient is above the acute level of concern of 0.01 (RQ =0.1 ppm/0.3 ppm= 0.33). However, the low solubility of 2,4-D BEE and its rapid hydrolysis to 2,4-D acid means fish are more likely to be exposed to the much less toxic 2,4-D acid. 2,4-D acid has a toxicity similar to 2,4-D DMA to fish (LC50=20 mg to 358 mg a.i./L for the common carp and rainbow trout, respectively). In contrast, formal risk assessment with 2,4-D acid indicates that short- term exposure to 2,4-D BEE should not cause adverse impact to fish since the risk quotient is below the federal level of concern of 0.01 (RQ= 0.1 ppm/20 ppm= 0.005). To conclude, 2,4-D BEE will have no significant impact on the animal biota acutely or chronically when using applied rates recommended on the label (Washington State Dept. of Ecology, 2001b). Although laboratory data indicates that 2,4-D BEE may be toxic to fish, free-swimming invertebrates and benthic invertebrates, data indicates that its toxic potential is not realized under typical concentrations and conditions found in the field. This lack of field toxicity is likely due to the low solubility of 2,4-D BEE and its rapid hydrolysis to the practically non-toxic 2,4-D acid within a few hours to a day following the application. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 33 Glyphosate Examination of mammalian toxicity has shown that the acute oral and dermal toxicity of glyphosate would fall into EPA's toxicity category III. This category characterizes slightly to moderately toxic compounds. Glyphosate is practically nontoxic by ingestion, with a reported acute oral LD50 of 5600 mg/kg in tested rats. The risks of incidental contact from swimming in treated water have also been judged as low with a dermal LD50 of 7940 mg/kg, a very high threshold. The RfD for glyphosate is 0.1 mg/kg/d. To place the level of hazard to humans in perspective, the commonly consumed chemicals caffeine (present in coffee, tea, and certain soft drinks), aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), and nicotine (the neuroactive ingredient in tobacco)have acute oral LD50's of 192, 1683, and 53 mg/kg, respectively. Thus, the herbicides for the most part are comparatively less toxic than chemicals to which consumers voluntarily expose themselves (Felsot, 1998). Since the shikimic acid pathway does not exist in animals, the acute toxicity of glyphosate is very low. Animal studies, which the Environmental Protection Agency has evaluated in support of the registration of glyphosate, can be used to make inferences relative to human health. The U.S. Forest Service's glyphosate fact sheet reports that the EPA has concluded that glyphosate should be classified as a compound with evidence of non-carcinogenicity for humans (Information Ventures, Inc.). This conclusion is based on the lack of convincing carcinogenicity evidence in adequate studies in two animal species. Laboratory studies on glyphosate using pregnant rats (dose levels up to 3500 mg/kg per day) and rabbits (dose levels up to 350 mg/kg per day), indicated no evidence of teratology (birth defects). A three-generation reproduction study in rats did not show any adverse effects on fertility or reproduction at doses up to 30 mg/kg per day. Glyphosate was negative in all tests for mutagenicity (the ability to cause genetic damage). Technically, glyphosate acid is practically nontoxic to fish and may be slightly toxic to aquatic invertebrates (EXTOXNET, 1996). Some formulations may be more toxic to fish and aquatic species due to differences in toxicity between the salts and the parent acid, or to surfactants used in the formulation. There is a very low potential for the compound to build up in the tissues of aquatic invertebrates or other aquatic organisms. In water, glyphosate is strongly adsorbed to suspended organic and mineral matter and is broken down primarily by microorganisms. In relation to shoreline applications, glyphosate is moderately persistent in soil, with an estimated average half-life of 47 days. It is strongly adsorbed to most soils, even those with lower organic and clay content. Thus, even though it is highly soluble in water, field and laboratory studies show it does not leach appreciably, and has low potential for runoff(except as adsorbed to colloidal matter). One estimate indicated that less than 2% of the applied chemical is lost to runoff(Malik et. al., 1989). Microbes are primarily responsible for the breakdown of the product, and volatilization or photodegradation losses will be negligible. The manufacturer of Rodeo®, one of the aquatic formulations of glyphosate, recommends use of a nonionic surfactant with all applications to improve efficacy. Of the approved surfactants for aquatic use in Washington, only LI-700 (Loveland Industries, Inc.)may be used for fragrant waterlily control and will therefore be applied directly to the water. Based on the results of searches of the published literature and the Toxic Substances Control Act Test Submission (TSCATS) database, little data are available regarding the toxicity of the surfactant formulations (Diamond& Durkin, 1997). The oral LD50 was >5000 and 5900 mg/kg in male and female rats, respectively, and the dermal LD50 for a 24- hour exposure was >5000 mg/kg in rabbits. These values are in the same range as glyphosate alone, EPA's toxicity category III, which puts LI-700 in a category of lower risk to mammals. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 34 Suitability for North Lake Aquatic herbicides can provide an effective method for control and eventual eradication of noxious weeds. The use of a formulation of triclopyr or 2,4-D should provide excellent initial control of the Eurasian watermilfoil while allowing for the more-appropriate spot treatments in this scattered infestation. We should be able to avoid an expensive, lake-wide treatment with fluridone for control of Eurasian watermilfoil. The loose sediments in North Lake are high in organic content and are flocculent around much of the lake's littoral zone. Triclopyr TEA and 2,4-D DMA would be applied in liquid formulation would be applied in a liquid formulation. The 2,4-D DMA also carries with it the reduced acute toxicity reported above, which could mitigate any potential harm to fish and their food web. Work in 2003 with 2,4-D DMA in Spring Lake resulted in excellent control of milfoil with no observed regrowth (M. Murphy, pers. comm.). North Lake does not have anadromous salmonids because impassable fish barriers exist along the Hylebos Creek system. Neither herbicide (Triclopyr or 2,4-D DMA) should have any downstream effects since the rapid hydrolysis produces a chemical that is practically non-toxic. Glyphosate should be very effective on the other target species: purple loosestrife, fragrant waterlily, and yellow flag iris. Westerdahl and Getsinger(1988)report excellent control of the fragrant waterlily with glyphosate. Generally glyphosate is the recommended herbicide for waterlily control because it can be applied directly to the floating leaves, unlike fluridone or endothall which must be applied to the water. The application of glyphosate allows specific plants or areas of plants to be targeted for removal. Generally two applications of glyphosate are needed. The second application later in the summer controls the plants that were missed during the first herbicide application. The control effectiveness of fragrant waterlily is easy to measure through visual surveys due to the floating leaves. Glyphosate should provide excellent systemic control of mature purple loosestrife plants and seedlings. This herbicide is very effective on purple loosestrife and we can expect better than 70-80% control on existing plants after Year 1. Seeds of purple loosestrife can remain viable for three years in the laboratory, but may remain viable for a much shorter time in the natural environment (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board, 1997). Therefore, the existing mature plants and seedbank may be exhausted within the time frame of the project. Finally, Glyphosate should also provide excellent systemic control of yellow flag iris. This species has an abundant leaf surface area to absorb the chemical for translocation to the rhizome. The use of a herbicide will enable the elimination of the mature plants without potentially destructive disturbance of the shoreline by excavation. Both triclopyr and 2,4-D used for milfoil control, may also be an effective alternative for the purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris control efforts. However, this chemical is more expensive, so an evaluation of the effectiveness of glyphosate on these species will determine whether a change in herbicide would be beneficial. One of the main reasons to eradicate milfoil and fragrant waterlily is to maintain the health of the native aquatic plant community for all of the species that utilize them in their life cycles, as well as to maintain the viability of the lake for human recreational uses. The nature of the control methods to be implemented will minimize impacts to native aquatic vegetation. The control of the Eurasian watermilfoil and fragrant waterlily will be conducted by methods designed to preserve (and eventually enhance or conserve)the native plant communities. Herbicide selective to Eurasian watermilfoil will be used for its control and will not require a whole-lake treatment that would expose North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 35 all the submersed plants to the herbicide. The herbicide for the fragrant waterlily will be applied to the floating leaves, and therefore should be easily focused to kill only the target vegetation. Follow- up control methods (diver hand pulling and/or diver dredging) will focus specifically on these two target species and should also leave beneficial plants intact. With these constraints in place, conservation areas should not need to be established to serve vital ecosystem functions until native plants re-establish. The application of herbicide to the emergent species (purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris)will also be conducted by manual spot applications. An experienced herbicide applicator can selectively target individual weed species and limit collateral damage to other species to a minimum. This is especially true when infestations are small so that large areas with a diverse plant distribution don't have to be treated. Emergent noxious weed infestations at North Lake are wide spread in the lake but careful application of herbicide to the waterlilies should avoid collateral damage and preserve the native plant community. We do not anticipate any need to revegetate after controlling the milfoil and fragrant waterlily since less than 25% of the lake is currently colonized with aquatic plants. In the terrestrial environment in the Pacific Northwest, bare ground will often be colonized rapidly by invasive species, but this is not usually a problem in lacustrine areas. A drawback of using herbicides is the "uplifting" of mats of decomposing waterlily roots that can form large floating islands in the waterbody after the herbicides have killed the plants. The waterlilies are in large monospecific stands around the lake. These areas could potentially generate floating sediment mats because of their size. Volunteers from the community will remove any sediment mats created in these areas, for which we will need to get Hydraulic Project Approval from WDFW. For smaller mats, we may tow them to shore and remove the sediment with hand tools. If larger mats occur, we will have to investigate machinery mounted on a barge to dig or dredge out the sediment mat. Past community efforts at North Lake have used aquatic herbicides, so we do not anticipate disagreement with this recommendation from the community. Initial support has been documented in the form of signatures on a Letter of Support distributed after the second watershed-wide meeting on June 28th, 2004. Prior to any activities on the lake, outreach materials will be sent to all watershed residents informing them of the actions and appropriate contact information will be provided for any questions or comments. The watershed residents will be notified prior to any treatments with the anticipated treatment dates Some residences on North Lake have water rights. To ensure that all residents who might draw water from the lake are aware of water use restrictions, there will be announcements sent to all lakeside residents prior to each herbicide treatment. One announcement will be sent at the beginning of the summer with approximate dates of planned treatments, and subsequent announcements will be sent 7- 10 days prior to each treatment, with exact dates of treatment and use restrictions. The announcement must let water right holders know who to contact should this interfere with their rights. The lake group may have to provide alternate water sources to these people should they object to the treatment Manual Methods Hand-Pulling Hand-pulling aquatic plants is similar to pulling weeds out of a garden. It involves removing entire plants (leaves, stems, and roots) from the area of concern and disposing of them in an area away from the shoreline. In water less than three feet deep no specialized equipment is required, although a North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 36 spade, trowel, or long knife may be needed if the sediment is packed or heavy. In deeper water, hand pulling is best accomplished by divers with SCUBA equipment and mesh bags for the collection of plant fragments. Some sites may not be suitable for hand pulling such as areas where deep flocculent sediments may cause a person hand pulling to sink deeply into the sediment. Cutting Cutting differs from hand pulling in that plants are cut and the roots are not removed. Cutting is performed by standing on a dock or on shore and throwing a cutting tool out into the water. A non- mechanical aquatic weed cutter is commercially available. Two single-sided, razor sharp stainless steel blades forming a"V" shape are connected to a handle, which is tied to a long rope. The cutter can be thrown about 20—30 feet into the water. As the cutter is pulled through the water, it cuts a 48- inch wide swath. Cut plants rise to the surface where they can be removed. Washington State requires that cut plants be removed from the water. The stainless steel blades that form the V are extremely sharp and great care must be taken with this implement. It should be stored in a secure area where children do not have access. Raking A sturdy rake makes a useful tool for removing aquatic plants. Attaching a rope to the rake allows removal of a greater area of weeds. Raking literally tears plants from the sediment, breaking some plants off and removing some roots as well. Specially designed aquatic plant rakes are available. Rakes can be equipped with floats to allow easier plant and fragment collection. The operator should pull towards the shore because a substantial amount of plant material can be collected in a short distance. Cleanup All of the manual control methods create plant fragments. It's important to remove all fragments from the water to prevent them from re-rooting or drifting onshore. Plants and fragments can be composted or added directly to a garden. Advantages • Manual methods are easy to use around docks and swimming areas. • The equipment is inexpensive. • Hand-pulling allows the flexibility to remove undesirable aquatic plants while leaving desirable plants. • These methods are environmentally safe. • Manual methods don't require expensive permits, and can be performed on aquatic noxious weeds with Hydraulic Project Approval obtained by reading and following the pamphlet Aquatic Plants and Fish (publication#APF-1-98) available from the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 37 Disadvantages • As plants re-grow or fragments re-colonize the cleared area, the treatment may need to be repeated several times each summer. • Because these methods are labor intensive, they may not be practical for large areas or for thick weed beds. • Even with the best containment efforts, it is difficult to collect all plant fragments, leading to re- colonization. • Some plants, like waterlilies, which have massive rhizomes, are difficult to remove by hand pulling. • Pulling weeds and raking stirs up the sediment and makes it difficult to see remaining plants. Sediment re-suspension can also increase nutrient levels in lake water. • Hand pulling and raking impacts bottom-dwelling animals. • The V-shaped cutting tool is extremely sharp and can be dangerous to use. Permits Permits are required for many types of manual projects in lakes and streams. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife requires a Hydraulic Project Approval permit for all activities taking place in the water including hand pulling, raking, and cutting of aquatic plants. Costs • Hand-pulling costs up to $130 for the average waterfront lot for a hired commercial puller. • A commercial grade weed cutter costs about $130 with accessories. A commercial rake costs about $95 to $125. A homemade weed rake costs about $85 (asphalt rake is about $75 and the rope costs 35-75 cents per foot). Other Considerations The community may need to invest money into buying the equipment and operation. Manual methods must include regular scheduled surveys to determine the extent of the remaining weeds and/or the appearance of new plants after eradication has been attained. This is a large time investment by lakeside residents. Suitability for North Lake Manual methods will be important in assisting in milfoil eradication, after the chemical control methods have been evaluated for their effectiveness. At this point, diver hand-pulling should be sufficient to remove all of the remaining Eurasian watermilfoil plants. Manual methods will also be vital in combating new infestations of Eurasian watermilfoil in subsequent years, especially around the boat launch. Based on the ways in which milfoil propagates, most manual methods are not North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 38 appropriate for milfoil eradication. Several of the methods create plant fragments, which can spread the milfoil throughout the lake. Manual methods have the potential for missing Eurasian watermilfoil plants, especially after stirring up sediments. Cutting can be used to control small areas of fragrant waterlily, especially those close to the shoreline. Using this method out in the open water would require a stable boat (not canoe) and great care not to injure oneself or another passenger. Since repeated cutting over several seasons may be required to starve the roots, this would fit best as a supplement to other control methods. Many landowners have already been manually removing their loosestrife for several seasons. This does not kill the mature perennial plants, but does halt seed production and can contain the infestation at current levels. If done repeatedly over several seasons it should starve the roots and kill the plants. Manual removal of seedlings (pulling) of purple loosestrife is much easier than the removal of well- rooted, mature plants. This technique can be used to exhaust the seed bank and supplement other eradication efforts. Manual efforts are much more difficult on yellow flag iris since the plants don't emerge from simple stems that can be cut, and they arise from massive rhizomes inhibiting pulling or digging. There is a large amount of root mass associated with the iris in this area that would take a significant effort to remove by excavation. Diver Dredging Diver dredging (suction dredging) is a method whereby SCUBA divers use hoses attached to small dredges (often dredges used by miners for mining gold from streams)to suck plant material from the sediment. The purpose of diver dredging is to remove all parts of the plant including the roots. A good operator can accurately remove target plants, like Eurasian watermilfoil, while leaving native species untouched. The suction hose pumps the plant material and the sediments to the surface where they are deposited into a screened basket. The water and sediment are returned back to the water column(if the permit allows this), and the plant material is retained. The turbid water is generally discharged to an area curtained off from the rest of the lake by a silt curtain. The plants are disposed of on shore. Removal rates vary from approximately 0.25 acres per day to one acre per day depending on plant density, sediment type, size of team, and diver efficiency. Diver dredging is more effective in areas where softer sediment allows easy removal of the entire plants, although water turbidity is increased with softer sediments. Harder sediment may require the use of a knife or tool to help loosen sediment from around the roots. In very hard sediments, milfoil plants tend to break off leaving the roots behind and defeating the purpose of diver dredging. Diver dredging has been used in British Columbia, Washington, and Idaho to remove early infestations of Eurasian watermilfoil. In a large-scale operation in western Washington, two years of diver dredging reduced the population of milfoil by 80 percent (Silver Lake, Everett). Diver dredging is less effective on plants where seeds, turions, or tubers remain in the sediments to sprout the next growing season. For that reason, Eurasian watermilfoil is generally the target plant for removal during diver dredging operations. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 39 Advantages • Diver dredging can be a very selective technique for removing pioneer colonies of Eurasian watermilfoil. • Divers can remove plants around docks and in other difficult to reach areas. • Diver dredging can be used in situations where herbicide use is not an option for aquatic plant management. Disadvantages • Diver dredging is very expensive. • Dredging stirs up large amounts of sediment. This may lead to the release of nutrients or long- buried toxic materials into the water column. • Only the tops of plants growing in rocky or hard sediments may be removed, leaving a viable root crown behind to initiate growth. • In some states, acquisition of permits can take years. Permits Permits are required for many types of projects in lakes and streams. Diver dredging requires Hydraulic Approval from the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Check with your city or county for any local requirements before proceeding with a diver-dredging project. Also diver dredging may require a Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Costs Depending on the density of the plants, specific equipment used, number of divers and disposal requirements, costs can range from a minimum of$1,500 to $2,000 per day. Other Considerations Could be good spot control method in subsequent years (coordinated with diver survey). Suitability for North Lake Diver dredging removes the plant in its entirety. It removes the biomass above the sediment as well as the tubers in the sediment. This option is best used for pioneering infestation and in soft sediments. Diver dredging could be used after the initial herbicide applications to remove plants that were missed or unaffected by the herbicide. The soft organic sediments in North Lake should make this method effective. However, permit costs may warrant having this work done as diver hand pulling since the roots should be largely removed from the loose sediments without the need for dredging. Diver dredging greatly disturbs sediments and can affect nutrient concentrations and algal production in the lake (see Disadvantages above). If other techniques of for removal are suitable,this should not be considered. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 40 Bottom Screens A bottom screen or benthic barrier covers the sediment like a blanket, compressing aquatic plants while reducing or blocking light. Materials such as burlap, plastics, perforated black Mylar, and woven synthetics can all be used as bottom screens. Some people report success using pond liner materials. There is also a commercial bottom screen fabric called Texel, a heavy, felt-like polyester material, which is specifically designed for aquatic plant control. An ideal bottom screen should be durable, heavier than water, reduce or block light, prevent plants from growing into and under the fabric, be easy to install and maintain, and should readily allow gases produced by rotting weeds to escape without"ballooning"the fabric upwards. Even the most porous materials, such as window screen, will billow due to gas buildup. Therefore, it is very important to anchor the bottom barrier securely to the bottom. Unsecured screens can create navigation hazards and are dangerous to swimmers. Anchors must be effective in keeping the material down and must be regularly checked. Natural materials such as rocks or sandbags are preferred as anchors. The duration of weed control depends on the rate that weeds can grow through or on top of the bottom screen, the rate that new sediment is deposited on the barrier, and the durability and longevity of the material. For example, burlap may rot within two years, plants can grow through window screening material, and can grow on top of felt-like Texel fabric. Regular maintenance is essential and can extend the life of most bottom barriers. Bottom screens will control most aquatic plants, however freely-floating species such as the bladderworts or coontail will not be controlled by bottom screens. Plants like Eurasian watermilfoil will send out lateral surface shoots and may canopy over the area that has been screened giving less than adequate control. In addition to controlling nuisance weeds around docks and in swimming beaches, bottom screening has become an important tool to help eradicate and contain early infestations of noxious weeds such as Eurasian watermilfoil and Brazilian elodea. Pioneering colonies that are too extensive to be hand pulled can sometimes be covered with bottom screening material. For these projects, we suggest using burlap with rocks or burlap sandbags for anchors. By the time the material decomposes, the milfoil patches will be dead as long as all plants were completely covered. Snohomish County staff reported native aquatic plants colonizing burlap areas that covered pioneering patches of Eurasian watermilfoil. When using this technique for Eurasian watermilfoil eradication projects, divers should recheck the screen within a few weeks to make sure that all milfoil plants remain covered and that no new fragments have taken root nearby. Bottom screens can be installed by the homeowner or by a commercial plant control specialist. Installation is easier in winter or early spring when plants have died back. In summer, cutting or hand pulling the plants first will facilitate bottom screen installation. Research has shown that much more gas is produced under bottom screens that are installed over the top of aquatic plants. The less plant material that is present before installing the screen, the more successful the screen will be in staying in place. Bottom screens may also be attached to frames rather than placed directly onto the sediment. The frames may then be moved for control of a larger area. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 41 Advantages • Installation of a bottom screen creates an immediate open area of water. • Bottom screens are easily installed around docks and in swimming areas. • Properly installed bottom screens can control up to 100 percent of aquatic plants. • Screen materials are readily available and can be installed by homeowners or by divers. Disadvantages • Because bottom screens reduce habitat by covering the sediment, they are suitable only for localized control. • For safety and performance reasons, bottom screens must be regularly inspected and maintained. • Harvesters, rotovators, fishing gear, propeller backwash, or boat anchors may damage or dislodge bottom screens. • Improperly anchored bottom screens may create safety hazards for boaters and swimmers. • Swimmers may be injured by poorly maintained anchors used to pin bottom screens to the sediment. • Some bottom screens are difficult to anchor on deep muck sediments. • Bottom screens interfere with fish spawning and bottom-dwelling animals. • Without regular maintenance aquatic plants may quickly colonize the bottom screen. Permits Bottom screening in Washington requires Hydraulic Project Approval. Local jurisdictions may require shoreline permits. Costs Barrier materials cost $0.22 to $1.25 per square foot. The cost of some commercial barriers includes an installation fee. Commercial installation costs vary depending on sediment characteristics and type of bottom screen selected. It costs up to about $750 to have 1,000 square feet of bottom screen installed. Maintenance costs for a waterfront lot are about $120 each year. Other Considerations None North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 42 Suitability for North Lake Bottom barriers have been used in other lakes to control aquatic plants. Without constant upkeep and maintenance the long-term benefits of bottom barriers are minimal. Currently, infested areas are to spread out to use a bottom barrier without becoming cost prohibitive. Most of the lakeshore residences have only small infestations and the bottom barrier would just reduce habitat by covering the sediment. Barriers could be effective at the boat ramp to prevent re-infestation after initial control, or in areas that have dense milfoil and have shown resistance to the herbicide. Installing a bottom barrier at the boat launch can provide these benefits. Since there is not a swimming beach at North Lake, the boat launch seems the only appropriate place to install a bottom barrier to enhance the recreational potential of the lake. Biological Control General Overview Many problematic aquatic plants in the western United States are non-indigenous species. Plants like Eurasian watermilfoil, Brazilian elodea, and purple loosestrife have been introduced to North America from other continents. Here they grow extremely aggressively, forming monocultures that exclude native aquatic plants and degrade fish and wildlife habitat. Yet, often these same species are not aggressive or invasive in their native range. This may be in part because their populations are kept under control by insects, diseases, or other factors not found in areas new to them. The biological control of aquatic plants focuses on the selection and introduction of other organisms that have an impact on the growth or reproduction of a target plant, usually from their native ranges. Theoretically, by stocking an infested waterbody or wetland with these organisms, the target plant can be controlled and native plants can recover. Classic biological control uses control agents that are host specific. These organisms attack only the species targeted for control. Generally these biocontrol agents are found in the native range of the nuisance aquatic plants and, like the targeted plant, these biocontrol agents are also non-indigenous species. With classic biological control an exotic species is introduced to control another exotic species. However, extensive research must be conducted before release to ensure that biological control agents are host specific and will not harm the environment in other ways. The authors of Biological Control of Weeds A World Catalogue of Agents and Their Target Weeds state that after 100 years of using biocontrol agents, there are only eight examples, world-wide, of damage to non- target plants, "none of which has caused serious economic or environmental damage...". Search for a classical biological control agent typically starts in the region of the world that is home to the nuisance aquatic plant. Researchers collect and rear insects and/or pathogens that appear to have an impact on the growth or reproduction of the target species. Those insects/pathogens that appear to be generalists (feeding or impacting other aquatic plant species) are rejected as biological control agents. Insects that impact the target species (or very closely related species) exclusively are considered for release. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 43 Once collected, these insects are reared and tested for host specificity and other parameters. Only extensively researched, host-specific organisms are cleared by the United States for release. It generally takes a number of years of study and specific testing before a biological control agent is approved. Even with an approved host-specific bio-control agent, control can be difficult to achieve. Some biological control organisms are very successful in controlling exotic species and others are of little value. A number of factors come into play. It is sometimes difficult to establish reproducing populations of a bio-control agent. The ease of collection of the biocontrol and placement on the target species can also have a role in the effectiveness. Climate or other factors may prevent its establishment, with some species not proving capable of over-wintering in their new setting. Sometimes the bio-control insects become prey for native predator species, and sometimes the impact of the insect on the target plant just isn't enough to control the growth and reproduction of the species. People who work in this field say that the more biological control species that you can put to work on a problem plant, the better success you will have in controlling the targeted species. There are some good examples where numerous biological control agents have had little effect on a targeted species, and other examples where one bio-control agent was responsible for the complete control of a problem species. However, even when biological control works, a classic biological control agent generally does not totally eliminate all target plants. A predator-prey cycle establishes where increasing predator populations will reduce the targeted species. In response to decreased food supply(the target plant is the sole food source for the predator), the predator species will decline. The target plant species rebounds due to the decline of the predator species. The cycle continues with the predator populations building in response to an increased food supply. Although a successful biological control agent rarely eradicates a problem species, it can reduce populations substantially, allowing native species to return. Used in an integrated approach with other control techniques, biological agents can stress target plants making them more susceptible to other control methods. A number of exotic aquatic species have approved classic biological control agents available for release in the US. These species include Hydrilla, water hyacinth, alligator weed, and purple loosestrife. In 1992 three beetles were released in Washington for purple loosestrife control. Their damaging impact on purple loosestrife populations was evident in the Winchester Wasteway area of Grant County in 1996. In 1998, 1999, and 2000, the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board organized insect collection for state, local, and federal staff. Thousands of insects were collected and distributed to purple loosestrife sites throughout the state and even the United States. The King County Noxious Weed Control Program has placed Galerucella sp. from the Winchester Wasteway on a number of purple loosestrife sites, including North Lake. North Lake was chosen because of a high density of the target plant and the fact that other control methods were impractical. Large numbers of purple loosestrife dominates the boat launch at North Lake and surrounding shoreline. Chemical control was a much more expensive alternative and the beetle is showing success at being a control tool. Three releases have been done at the North Lake boat launch, one in 2002 and two in North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 44 2003. Approximately 800 beetles were released and have since been found in other areas of the lake. In the summer of 2004, a homeowner along the north shore of the lake found the beetles on her stand of purple loosestrife. However, if the beetles are not expected to rid the lakeshore of the purple loosestrife, an integrated approach will be necessary to achieve eradication. Another type of biological control uses general agents such as grass carp (see below)to manage problem plants. Unlike classical bio-control agents, these fish are not host specific and will not target specific species. Although grass carp do have food preferences, under some circumstances, they can eliminate all submersed vegetation in a waterbody. Like classic biological control agents, grass carp are exotic species and originate from Asia. In Washington, all grass carp must be certified sterile before they can be imported into the state. There are many waterbodies in Washington (mostly smaller sites)where grass carp are being used to control the growth of aquatic plants. During the past decade a third type of control agent has emerged. In this case, a native insect that feeds and reproduces on northern milfoil (Myriophyllum sibericum)which is native to North America, was found to also utilize the non-native Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum). Vermont government scientists first noticed that Eurasian watermilfoil had declined in some lakes and brought this to the attention of researchers. It was discovered that a native watermilfoil weevil (Euhrychiopsis lecontei) feeding on Eurasian watermilfoil caused the stems to collapse. Because native milfoil has thicker stems than Eurasian watermilfoil, the mining activity of the larvae does not cause it the same kind of damage. A number of declines of Eurasian watermilfoil have been documented around the United States and researchers believe that weevils may be implicated in many of these declines. Several researchers around the United States (Vermont, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio, & Washington) have been working to determine the suitability of this insect as a bio-control agent. The University of Washington conducted research into the suitability of the milfoil weevil for the biological control of milfoil in Washington lakes and rivers. Surveys have shown that in Washington the weevil is found more often in eastern Washington lakes and it seems to prefer more alkaline waters. However, it is also present in cooler, wetter western Washington. The most likely candidates for use as biological controls are discussed in the following section. Grass Carp hllp://www.ecy.wa.gov//pro grams/wq//lants/management/aqua024.html The grass carp (Cteno pharynogodon), also known as the white amur, is a vegetarian fish native to the Amur River in Asia. Because this fish feeds on aquatic plants, it can be used as a biological tool to control nuisance aquatic plant growth. In some situations, sterile (triploid) grass carp may be permitted for introduction into Washington waters. Permits are most readily obtained if the lake or pond is privately owned, has no inlet or outlet, and is fairly small. The objective of using grass carp to control aquatic plant growth is to end up with a lake that has about 20 to 40 percent plant cover, not a lake devoid of plants. In practice, grass carp often fail to control the plants, or in cases of overstocking, all the submersed plants are eliminated from the waterbody. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 45 The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife determines the appropriate stocking rate for each waterbody when they issue the grass carp-stocking permit. Stocking rates for Washington lakes generally range from 9 to 25 eight-to eleven-inch fish per vegetated acre. This number will depend on the amount and type of plants in the lake as well as spring and summer water temperatures. To prevent stocked grass carp from migrating out of the lake and into streams and rivers, all inlets and outlets to the pond or lake must be screened. For this reason, residents on waterbodies that support a salmon or steelhead run are rarely allowed to stock grass carp into these systems. Once grass carp are stocked in a lake, it may take from two to five years for them to control nuisance plants. Survival rates of the fish will vary depending on factors like presence of otters, birds of prey, or fish disease. A lake will probably need restocking about every ten years. Success with grass carp in Washington has been varied. Sometimes the same stocking rate results in no control, control, or even complete elimination of all underwater plants. Bonar et. Al. Found that only 18 percent of 98 Washington lakes stocked with grass carp at a median level of 24 fish per vegetated acre had aquatic plants controlled to an intermediate level. In 39 percent of the lakes, all submersed plant species were eradicated. It has become the consensus among researchers and aquatic plant managers around the country that grass carp are an all or nothing control option. They should be stocked only in waterbodies where complete elimination of all submersed plant species can be tolerated. Grass carp exhibit definite food preferences and some aquatic plant species will be consumed more readily than others. Pauley and Bonar performed experiments to evaluate the importance of 20 Pacific Northwest aquatic plant species as food items for grass carp. Grass carp did not remove plants in a preferred species-by-species sequence in multi-species plant communities. Instead they grazed simultaneously on palatable plants of similar preference before gradually switching to less preferred groups of plants. The relative preference of many plants was dependent upon what other plants were associated with them. The relative preference rank for the 20 aquatic plants tested was as follows: Potamogeton crispus (curly leaf pondweed) =P.pectinatus (sago pondweed) >P. zosteriformes (flat- stemmed pondweed) > Chara sp.(muskgrasses) =Elodea canadensis (American waterweed) =thin- leaved pondweeds Potamogeton spp. >Egeria densa (Brazilian elodea) (large fish only) >P. praelongus (white-stemmed pondweed) = Vallisneria americana (water celery) >Myriophyllum spicatum (Eurasian watermilfoil)> Ceratophyllum demersum (coontail) >Utricularia vulgaris (bladderwort) > Polygonum amphibium (water smartweed) >P. natans (floating leaved pondweed) > P. amplifolius (big leaf pondweed) >Brasenia schreberi (watershield) =Juncus sp.(rush) >Egeria densa (Brazilian elodea) (fingerling fish only) >Nymphaea sp. (fragrant waterlily) > Typha sp. (cattail) >Nuphar sp. (spatterdock). Generally in Washington, grass carp do not consume emergent wetland vegetation or waterlilies even when the waterbody is heavily stocked or over stocked. A heavy stocking rate of triploid grass carp in Chambers Lake, Thurston County resulted in the loss of most submersed species, whereas the fragrant waterlilies, bog bean, and spatterdock remained at pre-stocking levels. A stocking of 83,000 triploid grass carp into Silver Lake Washington resulted in the total eradication of all submersed species, including Eurasian watermilfoil, Brazilian elodea, and swollen bladderwort. However, the extensive wetlands surrounding Silver Lake have generally remained intact. In southern states, grass carp have been shown to consume some emergent vegetation(Washington State Department of Ecology, 2002). North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 46 Grass carp stocked into Washington lakes must be certified disease free and sterile. Sterile fish, called triploids because they have an extra chromosome, are created when the fish eggs are subjected to a temperature or pressure shock. Fish are verified sterile by collecting and testing a blood sample. Triploid fish have slightly larger blood cells and can be differentiated from diploid (fertile) fish by this characteristic. Grass carp imported into Washington must be tested to ensure that they are sterile. Because Washington does not allow fertile fish within the state, all grass carp are imported into Washington from out of state locations. Most grass carp farms are located in the southern United States where warmer weather allows for fast fish growth rates. Large shipments are transported in special trucks and small shipments arrive via air. Here are some facts about grass carp: • Are only distantly related to the undesirable European carp, and share few of its habits. • Generally live for at least ten years and possibly much longer in Washington State waters. • Will grow rapidly and reach at least ten pounds. They have been known to reach 40 pounds in the southern United States. • Feed only on plants at the age they are stocked into Washington waters. • Will not eat fish eggs, young fish or invertebrates, although baby grass carp are omnivorous. • Feed from the top of the plant down so that mud is not stirred up. However, in ponds and lakes where grass carp have eliminated all submersed vegetation the water becomes turbid. Hungry fish will eat organic material out of the sediments. • Have definite taste preferences. Plants like Eurasian milfoil and coontail are not preferred. American waterweed and thin leaved pondweeds are preferred. Waterlilies are rarely consumed in Washington waters. • Are dormant during the winter. Intensive feeding starts when water temperatures reach 68° F. • Prefer flowing water to still waters (original habitat is fluvial). • Are difficult to recapture once released. • They may not feed in swimming areas, docks, boating areas, or other sites where there is heavy human activity. Advantages • Grass carp are inexpensive compared to some other control methods and offer long-term control, but fish may need to be restocked at intervals. • Grass carp offer a biological alternative to aquatic plant control. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 47 Disadvantages • Depending on plant densities and types, it may take several years to achieve plant control using grass carp and in many cases control may not occur. • If the waterbody is overstocked, all submersed aquatic plants may be eliminated. Removing excess fish is difficult and expensive. • The type of plants grass carp prefer may also be those most important for habitat and for waterfowl food. • If not enough fish are stocked, less-favored plants, such as Eurasian milfoil, may take over the lake. • Stocking grass carp may lead to algae blooms. • All inlets and outlets to the lake or pond must be screened to prevent grass carp from escaping into streams, rivers, or other lakes. Permits Stocking grass carp requires a fish-stocking permit from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Also, if inlets or outlets need to be screened, an Hydraulic Project Approval application must be completed for the screening project. Costs In quantities of 10,000 or more, 8 to 12 inch sterile grass carp can be purchased for about $5.00 each for truck delivery. The cost of small air freighted orders will vary and is estimated at $8 to $10 per fish. Other Considerations • Would not achieve immediate results—takes time and is not guaranteed to work. • Community may have concerns with introduced species • Potential damage to the native plant community of the lake, which could result in the establishment of other aggressive plant species as pioneers • Concerns from fishermen about grass carp • Initial investment very expensive • The introduction of grass carp has generally been discouraged by State agencies, especially in systems like North Lake. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 48 Suitability for North Lake Grass carp are not suitable for aquatic plant control in North Lake. The infestation of milfoil has not reached a level where a bio-control such as grass carp would be necessary and the carp could remove all the beneficial plants that support a healthy fish population. Without cover and the invertebrates associated with beneficial native aquatic vegetation, the system would be degraded and some species (invertebrates, fish, etc.)may be extirpated. Watermilfoil Weevil The following information and citations on the watermilfoil weevil are taken from the Washington State Department of Ecology's website on Aquatic Plant Management. hqp://www.ecy.wa.aovL/proarams/wq/�lants/manaaement/weevil.html The milfoil weevil,Euhrychiopsis lecontei, has been associated with declines of Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) in the United States (e.g. Illinois, Minnesota, Vermont, and Wisconsin). Researchers in Vermont found that the milfoil weevil can negatively impact Eurasian watermilfoil by suppressing the plants growth and reducing its buoyancy(Creed and Sheldon 1995). In 1989, state biologists reported that Eurasian watermilfoil in Brownington Pond, Vermont had declined from approximately 10 hectares (in 1986)to less than 0.5 hectares. Researchers from Middlebury College, Vermont hypothesized that the milfoil weevil, which was present in Brownington Pond, played a role in reducing Eurasian watermilfoil (Creed and Sheldon 1995). During 1990 through 1992, researchers monitored the populations of Eurasian watermilfoil and the milfoil weevil in Brownington Pond. They found that by 1991 Eurasian watermilfoil cover had increased to approximately 2.5 hectares (approximately 55-65 g/m2) and then decreased to about 1 hectare (<15 g/m2) in 1992. Weevil abundance began increasing in 1990 and peaked in June of 1992, where 3 —4 weevils (adults and larvae)per stem were detected (Creed and Sheldon 1995). These results supported the hypothesis that the milfoil weevil played a role in reducing Eurasian watermilfoil in Brownington Pond. Another documented example where a crash of Eurasian watermilfoil has been attributed to the milfoil weevil is in Cenaiko Lake, Minnesota. Researchers from the University of Minnesota reported a decline in the density of Eurasian watermilfoil from 123 g/m2 in July of 1996 to 14 g/m2 in September of 1996. Eurasian watermilfoil remained below 5 g/m2 in 1997, then increased to 44 g/m2 in June and July of 1998 and declined again to 12 g/m2 in September of 1998 (Newman and Biesboer, in press). In contrast, researchers found that weevil abundance in Cenaiko Lake was 1.6 weevils (adults and larvae)per stem in July of 1996. Weevil abundance, however, decreased with declining densities of Eurasian watermilfoil in 1996 and by September 1997 weevils were undetectable. In September of 1998 weevil abundance had increased to >2 weevils per stem (Newman and Biesboer, in press). Based on observations made by researchers in Vermont, Ohio and Wisconsin it seems that having 2 weevils (or more)per stem is adequate to control Eurasian watermilfoil. However, as indicated by the study conducted in Cenaiko Lake, Minnesota, an abundance of 1.5 weevils per stem may be sufficient in some cases (Newman and Biesboer, in press). In Washington State, the milfoil weevil is present primarily in eastern Washington and occurs on both Eurasian and northern watermilfoil (M. sibiricum), the latter plant being native to the state (Tamayo et. Al. 1999). During the summer of 1999, researchers from the University of Washington determined the abundance of the milfoil weevil in 11 lakes in Washington. They found, that weevil North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 49 abundance ranged from undetectable levels to 0.3 weevils (adults and larvae)per stem. Fan Lake, Pend Oreille County had the greatest density per stem of 0.6 weevils (adults, larvae and eggs per stem). The weevils were present on northern watermilfoil. These abundance results are well below the recommendations made by other researchers in Minnesota, Ohio, Vermont, and Wisconsin of having at least 1.5—2.0 weevils per stem in order to control Eurasian watermilfoil. To date, there have not been any documented declines of Eurasian watermilfoil in Washington State that can be attributed to the milfoil weevil, although Creed speculated that declines of Eurasian watermilfoil in Lake Osoyoos and the Okanogan River may have been caused by the milfoil weevil. In Minnesota, Cenaiko Lake is the only lake in that state that has had a Eurasian watermilfoil crash due to the weevil; other weevil lakes are yet to show declines in Eurasian watermilfoil. Researchers in Minnesota have suggested that sunfish predation may be limiting weevil densities in some lakes (Sutter and Newman 1997). The latter may be true for Washington State, as sunfish populations are present in many lakes in the state, including those with weevils. In addition, other environmental factors that may be keeping weevil populations in check in Washington, but have yet to be studied, include over-wintering survival and habitat quality and quantity(Jester et. Al. 1997; Tamayo et. Al., in press). Although the milfoil weevil shows potential as a biological control for Eurasian watermilfoil more work is needed to determine which factors limit weevil densities and what lakes are suitable candidates for weevil treatments in order to implement a cost and control effective program. Advantages • Milfoil weevils offer a biological alternative to aquatic plant control. • They may be cheaper than other control strategies. • Biocontrols enable weed control in hard-to-access areas and can become self-supporting in some systems. • If they are capable of reaching a critical mass, biocontrols can decimate a weed population. Disadvantages • There are many uncertainties as to the effectiveness of this biocontrol in western Washington waters. • There have not been any documented declines of Eurasian watermilfoil in Washington State that can be attributed to the milfoil weevil. • Many of our lakes, including North Lake, have introduced sunfish populations that may predate on the milfoil weevils. • Bio-controls often don't eradicate the target plant species, and there would be population fluctuations as the milfoil and weevil follow predator-prey cycles. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 50 Permits The milfoil weevil is native to Washington and is present in a number of lakes and rivers. It is found associated with both native northern milfoil and Eurasian watermilfoil. A company is selling milfoil weevils commercially. However, to import these out-of-state weevils into Washington requires a permit from the Washington Department of Agriculture. As of October 1, 2002 no permits have been issued for Washington. Costs The costs for researchers to locate, culture, and test bio-control agents is high. Once approved for use, insects can sell for $1.00 or more per insect. Sometimes it is possible to establish nurseries where weed specialists can collect insects for reestablishment elsewhere. Suitability for North Lake Since the milfoil weevil is a new bio-control agent, it has not been released yet intentionally in western Washington to control Eurasian watermilfoil. It is uncertain how effective the weevil will be and whether populations per stem can be maintained at levels high enough to eradicate Eurasian watermilfoil. Also, as with the grass carp, the infestation of milfoil in North Lake is not heavy enough to warrant bio-control introduction when other methods are still available. Rotovation, Harvesting, and Cutting Rotovation Rotovators use underwater rototiller-like blades to uproot Eurasian watermilfoil plants. The rotating blades churn seven to nine inches deep into the lake or river bottom to dislodge plant root crowns that are generally buoyant. The plants and roots may then be removed from the water using a weed rake attachment to the rototiller head or by harvester or manual collection. Harvesting Mechanical harvesters are large machines, which both cut and collect aquatic plants. Cut plants are removed from the water by a conveyor belt system and stored on the harvester until disposal. A barge may be stationed near the harvesting site for temporary plant storage or the harvester carries the cut weeds to shore. The shore station equipment is usually a shore conveyor that mates to the harvester and lifts the cut plants into a dump truck. Harvested weeds are disposed of in landfills, used as compost, or in reclaiming spent gravel pits or similar sites. Cutting Mechanical weed cutters cut aquatic plants several feet below the water's surface. Unlike harvesting, cut plants are not collected while the machinery operates. Suitability for North Lake None of these options are suitable for the level of infestation at North Lake. They are not eradication tools, but rather are used to manage and control heavy, widespread infestations of aquatic weeds. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 51 These processes create plant fragments, and therefore should not be used in systems where milfoil is not already widespread. In a moderate infestation such as North Lake, these methods would probably serve to spread and expand the infestation. According to Ecology, "There is little or no reduction in plant density with mechanical harvesting." Since the aim of this project is to eliminate milfoil from the system, these are not compatible control strategies. Harvesting and cutting do not remove root systems. Rotovation would cause damage to the lake sediments and associated animals in a system that does not already receive dredging for navigability. Drawdown Lowering the water level of a lake or reservoir can have a dramatic impact on some aquatic weed problems. Water level drawdown can be used where there is a water control structure that allows the managers of lakes or reservoirs to drop the water level in the waterbody for extended periods of time. Water level drawdown often occurs regularly in reservoirs for power generation, flood control, or irrigation; a side benefit being the control of some aquatic plant species. However, regular drawdowns can also make it difficult to establish native aquatic plants for fish, wildlife, and waterfowl habitat in some reservoirs. Suitability for North Lake Drawdown is not a viable control strategy for North Lake. The outlet from North Lake has a permanent weir with limited drawdown capacities. Not only would drawdown be difficult to achieve, it would also cause significant damage to the ecosystem. The amount of drawdown required to impact milfoil would dry out the littoral zone of the lake. This would damage native plants and animals in the lake and have many negative consequences for residents living around the lake. Without a surface inflow to the system, returning the water level to a previous state would be both cost and time prohibitive. Nutrient Reduction Nutrient Reduction Alternative At lakes in watersheds with identifiable sources of excess nutrients, a program to reduce nutrients entering the lake could possibly be an effective method of controlling aquatic vegetation. Sources of excessive nutrients might include failing septic tanks, other accidental or planned wastewater effluent, or runoff from agricultural lands. If nutrient reduction were enacted as the primary method of weed control, extensive research would be necessary to determine the current nutrient budget for the lake and surrounding watershed, whether nutrient reduction would result in milfoil reduction, and to identify and mitigate the natural and human-mediated nutrient sources. Suitability for North Lake Nutrient reduction is not an appropriate control measure for the following reasons: • It is not an eradication method. • There is no evidence that there is significant point-source nutrient loading at North Lake. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 52 • There is no evidence that reducing nutrient loads to the water column would impact milfoil growth. However, all lake groups should strive to reduce nutrient loading to their lake by practicing and implementing Best Management Practices. No Action Alternative One option for managing aquatic weeds in North Lake is to let aquatic weeds continue to grow, and do nothing to control them. This "no action" alternative would acknowledge the presence of the aquatic weeds but would not outline any management plan or enact any planned control efforts. Effectively, a no action determination would preclude any integrated treatment and/or control effort, placing the choice and responsibility of aquatic weed control with lakefront property owners. Suitability for North Lake The milfoil infestation is currently light to moderate in density; unless control measures are enacted, it is likely to increase each growing season in the future until the entire littoral zone of the lake is dominated by milfoil. Based on results of informal surveys by residents and King County staff, the infestations of milfoil, purple loosestrife, and fragrant waterlily have greatly increased since the last comprehensive plant survey in 1995 (King County, 1996). If there is no control effort, it is likely that weed infestations will continue to grow, making North Lake a prime source of milfoil fragments for other nearby lakes with public access and boat launch facilities, as well as a potential source of seed spread by purple loosestrife. Even if some of the residents chose to control the aquatic weeds near their properties, pockets of milfoil would remain. The surviving plants would fragment each autumn, spreading to other areas of the lake, including those that were treated by residents. The no action alternative is not preferred by members of the North Lake community, Weyerhaeuser, or the King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 53 INTEGRATED TREATMENT PLAN North Lake and its associated shoreline contain four listed noxious weed species that should have control measures implemented to halt the spread of their invasions and reverse the degradation currently occurring. The four target species are the Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), fragrant waterlily(Nymphaea odorata), purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), and yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus). Although all four species at North Lake are highly aggressive and are difficult to control/eradicate, we believe that the goal of eradication is reasonable for all of them, and we can be successful within the time frame of the project. Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) Year Initial control of Eurasian watermilfoil will be accomplished using an aquatic formulation of Triclopyr TEA (Renovate3 ®) in late May to early June over approximately 10 acres of milfoil- infested area as estimated in 2004 by King County Lake Stewardship and Noxious Weed staff (depending on court decisions and award money or 2,4-D (DMA*4IVM®, Aquakleen® or Navigate°) could be used). The contractor should survey the entire lake with divers using a GPS and marking all the points that need treatment. The areas are marked on the water's surface with buoys and then the application is performed from a boat using trailing hoses to disperse the herbicide underwater. Due to the nature of the sediments in North Lake (as described in Aquatic Plant Control Alternatives), Triclopyr TEA is the preferred formulation. Eradication of Eurasian watermilfoil is the end goal. A follow-up application in Year 1, about three weeks after the first, may be applied to pick up missed plants or late emergents. Only 2.5 mg/L of the herbicide is allowed to be applied during the growing season in the treatment area. We will plan for a maximum of 25% of the original area of 10 acres to need the second treatment. Diver hand-pulling (or diver dredging)will clean up any remaining milfoil found after both herbicide applications have had time to take effect(i.e. two to three weeks after the second herbicide treatment). A bottom barrier will be installed at the boat launch in the winter of Year 1 to ensure eradication in the vicinity, and to aid in preventing new introductions. Community education efforts will be continued, including training in milfoil identification and survey methods. There will also be an increase in the signage at the boat launch. The NPDES permit coverage from WSDA requires notification and posting of the waterbody, and these specific protocols will be followed. The NPDES permit also requires monitoring of the herbicide levels in the lake after treatment. Independent samples will be collected at the time of the application and again five days post treatment. A baseline sample will also be taken before the application, especially since Water Quality experts at Ecology report heightened levels of 2,4-D in our surface waters due to runoff after heavy storm events (K. Hamel, pers. comm.) One sample is taken from within the treatment area, and one from outside. These four samples (per application)will be sent to an independent, Ecology-accredited laboratory for the analysis. As more of these samples need to be analyzed to meet NPDES requirements, some companies may get an ELIZA test accredited through Ecology which will be less expensive. As the permit stands in 2003, this procedure will be performed each year an application for milfoil is conducted. Surveys after the initial application are essential to determining the success of the effort, and will be used to determine North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 54 what measures need to be implemented to complete the milfoil control for Year 1 (and subsequent years). Problems may arise if the same firm that conducted the herbicide application also surveys for the success of the effort. We plan to hire a separate, independent firm to conduct these surveys to overcome this potential problem. Volunteers from the North Lake community will be directly involved with overseeing the implementation of control work to keep the contractors accountable. Year 2 Year 2 will begin with diver surveys of the lake to check the status of the infestation. Spot herbicide treatment with triclopyr(Renovate3e) or 2,4-D (DMA*4IVM8, Aquakleen® or Navigate®)will begin in late May to early June over an estimated maximum of 50% of the original milfoil infested area (max. six acres). Obviously, if the diver surveys find greater than six acres need to be treated, the real infestation size will be accommodated. At this point we will have a sense as to whether the herbicide has eliminated a significant amount of the Eurasian watermilfoil, or whether it has seemed to become less effective. After the first herbicide application in Year 2, we will conduct the first diver hand-pulling/diver dredging about three to four weeks after the herbicide treatment. We plan for a maximum of 25% of the original area (or three acres)to need the first manual removal. We will follow this with a second survey in August with diver hand-pulling/ dredging as needed. At this point, we hope that less than 10% of the original area(or one acre)will be involved. Annual maintenance of the bottom barrier at the boat launch will consist of removal of rooted plants and sediment accumulations, as well as securing the barrier to the bottom to ensure safety and effectiveness. Continued community education will complete our Eurasian watermilfoil efforts for Year 2. Year 3 Year 3 will again begin with diver surveys of the lake to assess the milfoil distribution. If herbicide is needed we will stay with the original active ingredient for the herbicide treatment in Year 3. We project that no more than an acre total of Eurasian watermilfoil will need this treatment. We will then use diver hand-pulling/diver dredging as necessary if individual plants are discovered in our mid- summer survey. Annual maintenance of the bottom barrier at the boat launch and continued community education will complete our Eurasian watermilfoil efforts for Year 3. In Years 4-7 (and beyond), diver and surface surveys will occur at least twice during the growing season. Because permits for herbicide applications must be acquired far in advance, we plan to rely on diver hand-pulling as the control method. If at any point we find that we are losing ground on eradication efforts, we will apply for the appropriate permits and perform spot applications with herbicide. We will need to continue the bottom barrier maintenance annually. There should be no need to revegetate the areas of Eurasian watermilfoil after treatment. Most of the native submersed species are monocots (Potamogeton sp.)that should be relatively unaffected by either the Triclopyr or 2,4-D application. Removing the noxious invaders will halt the degradation of the system and allow the dynamic natural equilibrium to be maintained. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 55 Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) may be eliminated by this outlined integrated approach. Two herbicide applications per season in the first year(s), followed by manual methods, should ensure that no milfoil plants survive. Once the established plants are eradicated, and follow up surveys have verified their absence for several seasons, potential reintroduction will be a remaining challenge. Any areas that dewater will be checked for milfoil seedlings. Since North Lake does not currently have prolific plant growth, milfoil plants should be found easily and manual control methods should prove more effective than in a lake with dense beds of native vegetation. Fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata) Year Control efforts on the fragrant waterlily began in the summer of 2004 with Glyphosate. 10 acres of the lake was treated. The intensity of control will be equal across the entire lake, with eradication as the end goal. Triclopyr and 2,4-D may have some effect on fragrant waterlily since it is also a broad- leafed plant and there is some overlap in the distribution of these plants in North Lake. However, 2,4- D is reported as not being very effective on this species (K. Hamel, pers. comm.). At the same time as the second herbicide application for the Eurasian watermilfoil in Year 1, we will use Glyphosate (Rodeo® or Aquamaster) on the fragrant waterlilies around the lake to continue control. In addition to posting requirements, the NPDES permit requires monitoring of the glyphosate levels in the lake after treatment. Independent samples will be collected about one hour after the application and again 24 hours post treatment. One sample is taken from within the treatment area, and one from outside. These four samples (per application)will be sent to an independent, Ecology-accredited laboratory for the analysis. A follow up treatment may be done in the later summer of 2004 to insure control over the fragrant waterlily population. It is not likely that the lilies will be eradicated by year 1. Year 2 Year 2 will likely include another glyphosate application. Since milfoil will be treated with herbicide, we may get some control on the waterlilies from the triclopyr application. However, since triclopyr will be applied in spot applications to milfoil, there may be less and less overlap between milfoil and fragrant waterlily. In either case, a glyphosate application will be performed when floating leaves have formed on the waterlily(approximately the same time as Year 1). One glyphosate application is planned in Year 2 and will be followed by cutting and removing any plants not killed by the herbicide. This manual control will be performed by the end of the summer before the plants set seed. Year 3 In future years, we may need to eliminate returning plants or new infestations. We have planned for a "final"herbicide application in Year 3 as a contingency. Cutting will be used to control small areas of waterlily. If the level of waterlily infestation again gets to the point where manual control is no longer feasible, we will plan for an herbicide application the following summer. This lead-time is required to get the necessary permits. The native waterlily(Nuphar luteum) is well represented in the south end of the lake where much of the fragrant waterlily is currently found and is likely to expand its distribution. The selective nature of spot applications of Glyphosate should minimize impacts to non- target vegetation, and may allow the native waterlily to rebound or expand. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 56 Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) North Lake was chosen for Galerucella calmariensis, a biological control, release because of a high density of the target plant and the fact that other control methods were impractical. Large numbers of purple loosestrife dominates the boat launch at North Lake and surrounding shoreline. Chemical control was a much more expensive alternative and the beetle has proven to be a successful management tool. Three releases have been done at the North Lake boat launch, one in 2002 and two in 2003. Approximately 800 beetles were released and have since been found in other areas of the lake. According to the King County Noxious Weed specialist, Monica Walker, beetles alone are not sufficient to eradicate the purple loosestrife. An integrated approach will be necessary for eradication to be successful. One glyphosate application per year is planned for Years 1-3. Glyphosate will be wicked on to each plant, taking care that no other native, desirable plants receive the herbicide treatment. Plants will be rechecked 1 month after herbicide application, and any that have produced flowers will be manually controlled before they set seed. These plants will be cut at the base and disposed of as garbage. Guidance will be provided to residential landowners as to which native plants or non-aggressive exotics would serve well to perform the desired functions of buffer vegetation along their shorelines. Some landowners are concerned with aesthetic elements and would like to replace the beautiful floral display of purple loosestrife, whereas others have ecological concerns about buffering a waterbody with wetland vegetation to help maintain the health of the system. Part of the community education process will be bringing these two different views together to establish more natural landscapes on the residential parcels around the lake, and develop sustainable, noxious-weed-free systems. Purple loosestrife has decreased slightly due to four years of manual and biological control methods. Yellow flap iris (Iris pseudacorus) Control efforts on the yellow flag iris will focus on the entire shoreline. We plan to use a treatment with glyphosate (Rodeo® or Aquamaster), which should be done at the same time as the purple loosestrife and fragrant waterlily control. We plan to make one herbicide application in each of the first 3 years. Control efforts around the remainder of the lake will be accomplished through educational outreach. We will begin by asking residents to continue taking seed heads off the plants in late summer before they expand the infestation. We will also encourage landowners to start digging out the individual plants on their shoreline. Caution must be taken when working the yellow flag iris as the plant sap is poisonous and can cause severe blistering and irritation, if ingested it can cause vomiting and diarrhea. Gloves and care must be used when working with this plant. Permission from all of the individual landowners will be necessary before any herbicide work can proceed on their land. These efforts will be ongoing. Suggestions will be provided to residential landowners as to native plants or non-aggressive exotics that would serve well to perform the desired functions of buffer vegetation along their shorelines. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 57 PLAN ELEMENTS, COSTS, AND FUNDING Table 3 outlines the tasks and estimated costs of implementation on an annual basis. Implementation of the North Lake IAVMP will span at least seven years, at a total estimated cost of$58,272. The majority of the costs accrue in the first several years, which is the period of most aggressive treatment. Beyond that, costs are directed at detecting and controlling re-introduction of noxious aquatic plant species. Table 4: Budget with use of Triclopyr Task Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 7 year total Lily Treatment $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 2,000.00 Herbicide (triclopyr) $ 10,000.00 $ 3,900.00 $ 13,900.00 Emergent Weed Treatment $ 1,500.00 $ 1,125.00 $ 300.00 $ 2,925.00 Diver Survey $ 1,100.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 7,900.00 Diver Dredge/ handpull $ 7,680.00 $ 10,240.00 $ 1,280.00 $ 1,280.00 $ 1,280.00 $ 640.00 $ 640.00 $ 23,040.00 Boat launch bottom barrier $ 1,250.00 $ 215.00 $ 215.00 $ 215.00 $ 215.00 $ 215.00 $ 215.00 $ 2,540.00 Education and Outreach $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 750.00 $ 750.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 5,000.00 Printing Costs $ 1,000.00 $ 250.00 $ 250.00 $ 250.00 $ 1,750.00 Project Management $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 8,500.00 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Totals $25,930.00 $21,330.00 $5,395.00 $5,095.00 $4,095.00 $2,855.00 $2,855.00 $67,555.00 w/tax $5,923.63 10% contingency $6,731.40 Grand Total $80,210.03 North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 58 Table 5: Project budget with use of 2,4-D Task Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 7 year total Lily Treatment $1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 2,000.00 Herbicide(2,4 D) $9,759.00 $3,900.00 $ 13,659.00 Emergent Weed Treatment $1,500.00 $ 1,125.00 $ 300.00 $ 2,925.00 Diver Survey $1,100.00 $1,600.00 $1,600.00 $1,600.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $ 7,900.00 Diver Dredge/ handpull $7,680.00 $10,240.00 $1,280.00 $1,280.00 $1,280.00 $640.00 $640.00 $ 23,040.00 Boat launch bottom barrier $1,250.00 $215.00 $215.00 $215.00 $215.00 $215.00 $215.00 $ 2,540.00 Education and Outreach $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $750.00 $750.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $ 5,000.00 Printing Costs $1,000.00 $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 $ 1,750.00 Project Management $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 8,500.00 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Totals $25,689.00 $21,330.00 $5,395.00 $5,095.00 $4,095.00 $2,855.00 $2,855.00 $67,314.00 w/tax $5,791.63 10% contingency $6,581.40 Grand Total $79,687.03 North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 59 Sources of Funding There are several likely sources of funding available for project implementation: Grants The Washington State Department of Ecology has an Aquatic Weeds Management Fund (AWMF). This IAVMP was developed to be consistent with all AWMF guidelines and requirements. Given the relatively low-level infestation, outstanding ecological value of North Lake and its watershed, and the potential for infestation of neighboring lakes, it is hoped that Ecology and other grant programs will offer funding. Other possible funding sources include King County's WaterWorks and the Natural Resources Stewardship Network. Dedicated non-grant funds from King County The King County Noxious Weed Program has limited funds available to contribute to weed control projects. While this can not be considered an ongoing source of funding, $1000 is promised to the project in the first year of implementation. Community-Based Funding There is a proposal before the North Lake Improvement Club to begin collecting annual contributions estimated at $50, with the additional revenue to be dedicated to projects and programs designed to improve lake and watershed conditions. This could generate several thousand dollars over the first five years of the project. Noxious aquatic weed management currently tops the list of threats to the lake. If funds raised by requesting contributions prove insufficient, community members have discussed forming a Lake Management District (LMD). If implemented, a LMD would collect an annual fee from all watershed property owners. Fees would be weighted based on property size and proximity to the lake. Money collected through a LMD must be dedicated to addressing specific problems facing the lake and watershed. This IAVMP will provide some guidance should watershed residents choose to pursue a LMD. Matching Funds Table 6 shows the matching requirements outlined by Ecology's AWMF and the estimated in-kind match and cash match provided by King County and the North Lake Community. Table 6: Total Matching Funds (triclopyr) Total Project cost= $80,210.03 Budgeted Match %of Total 75%of total project $60,157.52 Required match $20,052.51 Budgeted in-kind match $13,825.00 17.2% Budgeted cash match $ 6,450.40 8.0% Ecology$ after match $59,934.63 North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 60 Table 7: Total Matching Funds (2,4-D) Total Project cost= $79,687.03 Budgeted %of Total 75%of total project $59,765.27 Required match $19,921.76 $ 13,825.00 17.3% $ 6,450.40 8.1% Ecology$after match $59,411.63 Table 8: In-kind Matching Funds Item Cost Units Units/year Years Notes Total Volunteer hours $ 15.00 per hour 135 5 8-10 very active $10,125.00 community members.-2 certified divers on lake. Time estimates include boats urveys,diver training,bottom barrier maintenance,steering committee meetings,ID workshops,educational flyer development. Educational Materials $ 500.00 peryear 1 5 Communitymember $ 2,500.00 Development and time spent developing Presentation materials and presenting materials to youth groups and other organizations Boat rental $ 40.00 1 per day 6 5 $ 1,200.00 Total est. in-kind match $13,825.00 Table 9: Cash Matching Funds Item Cost Units Units/year Years Notes Total Community self-tax $ 500.00 per year 1 5 Based on $ 2,500.00 implementation of one or more community-based funding strategies outlined in IAVMP.Will be assessed annually into future(indefinitely). KC DNRP Noxious Weed $ 1,000.00 per year 1 1 Dedicated cost share $ 1,000.00 Control Program Cost Share funds from Noxious Weed Control Program Grants $ 1,000.00 per year 1 2 Estimate based on likely $ 2,000.00 sources. KC Staff-Aquatic Noxious $31.68 per hour 10 3 See below for salary and $ 950.40 Weed Specialist burden rates as of 2003. Total est. cash match $ 6,450.40 North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 61 Table 10: KC Staff Salary and Burden Rates O't` `may. °\° �`�e�h�° eaa\5�a a�a ece'��,� a�a Hourly Burdened Position Hourly Rate Q O ti aRate Environmental Scientist $ 27.16 $ 7.99 $ 4.07 $ 6.79 $46.01 Water Quality Planner $ 25.29 $ 7.44 $ 3.79 $ 6.32 $42.84 Aquatic Weed Specialist $ 18.70 $ 5.50 $ 2.81 $ 4.68 $31.68 Table 11: Federal Way Staff and Benefit Rates Hourly Burdened Burdened Position Hourly Rate �e Rate Smith $ 35.00 $ 8.40 $43.40 Russel $ 22.70 $ 6.13 $28.83 Donald $ 30.27 $ 7.87 $ 38.14 North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 62 IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION The implementation of the plan will follow the process outlined below: 1. Convene a project Implementation Committee. Many Steering Committee members have indicated their willingness to transition into this role. 2. Review proposed plan and develop timeline with specific tasks. The IAVMP will guide this process. 3. Assign tasks to Implementation Committee members. 4. Issue a Request for Proposals for weed survey and control work. 5. Secure necessary permits. Permit application will be coordinated with the contracted applicator. 6. Implement community education plan. 7. Apply herbicide treatment.Application will be completed as prescribed in IAVMP, unless consultation with Ecology and the applicator leads to defensible changes in the plan. 8. Conduct follow-up surveys. Professional contractors and community members who have received adequate training can complete this work, with community participation under supervision of King County staff 9. Apply follow-up herbicide treatment if necessary. Follow-up surveys will determine the extent to which this work is necessary. 10. Conduct diver surveys and hand-pulling as necessary. Professional contractors and community members who have received adequate training can complete this work, with community participation under supervision of King County staff. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 63 BIBLIOGRAPHY Aiken, S. G., P.R. Newroth, and I. Wile. 1979. The biology of Canadian weeds. 34. Myriophyllum spicatum L. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 59:201-215. Cited in Sheldon and Creed, 1995. Beavers, Tom. July 2004. Personal communication. White River Basin Steward, King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks. Seattle, WA. Carlson, R.E. 1977.A trophic state index for lakes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 22:361- 368. Cleary, Julie. July 2004. E-mail correspondence. Resident of North Lake. King County, WA. Creed, R.P., Jr., and S.P. Sheldon. 1995. Weevils and watermilfoil: Did a North American herbivore cause the decline of an exotic weed? Ecological Applications 5(4): 1113-1121. Diamond, Gary L. and Patrick R. Durkin. 1997. Effects of Surfactants on the Toxicity of Glyphosate, with Specific Reference to RODEO. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), SERA TR 97-206-1b. Extension Toxicology Network (EXTOXNET). 1996. Pesticide Information Profiles: Glyphosate. Oregon State University. Retrieved August 14, 2002. Available online at: hqp:Hace.orst.edu/cai- bin/mfs/0l/Tips/gIyphosa.htrn Felsot, Allan S. 1998.Hazard Assessment of Herbicides Recommended for Use by the King County Noxious Weed Control Program. Prepared for the Utilities and Natural Resources Committee of the Metropolitan King County Council. Available online at: hqp:Hdnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/lands/weeds/herbicid.htm Friends of Hylebos Creek, 2004. The Hylebos Watershed Webpage. Available online at: http://www.hylebos.org/watershed/index.htm Hamel, Kathy. September 2002- February 2003. Personal communication. Aquatic Plant Specialist, Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, WA. Honey, Wendy. June 2004. Personal communication. Resident of North Lake community. King County, WA. Information Ventures, Inc. 1995. Pesticide Fact Sheet: Glyphosate. Prepared for U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Available online at: hqp://infoventures.com/e-hlth/pestcide/glyphos.html Jackson, Chad. October 2002. Personal Communication. Area Fish Biologist, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, WA. King County, 1991. Draft Hylebos Creek and Lower Puget Sound Basin Plan. Surface Water Management Division. King County, 1996.Aquatic Plant Mapping for 36 King County Lakes. Surface Water Management Division. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 64 King County, 200 1. King County Lake Water Quality:A Trend Report on King County Small Lakes. Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Lake Stewardship Program. King County, 2003. Data from King County's Lake Stewardship Volunteer Monitoring Program. King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks. Malik, J., G. Barry, and G. Kishore. 1989. Mini-review: The herbicide glyphosate. BioFactors. 2(1): 17 25, 1989.10-100 Reed, P. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest Region 9. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88 (26.9). Richter, K.0. and A.L. Azous, 2001 a.Amphibian Distribution, Abundance, and Habitat Use in: Wetlands and Urbanization: Implication for the Future. Azous, A.L. and R.R. Horner(eds), Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton. 338 pp. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey King County Area Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D. C. Walker, Monica. August 2004. E-mail correspondence. Noxious Weed Specialist, King County Noxious Weed Group. Seattle, WA. Washington State Department of Ecology, 2001 a.An Aquatic Plant Identification Manual for Washington's Freshwater Plants. 195pp. Washington State Department of Ecology, 2001b. Herbicide Risk Assessment for the Aquatic Plant Management Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement(Appendix C- Volume 3: 2,4-D). Available online at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0010043.pdf Washington State Department of Ecology, 2002.Aquatic Plant Management website. Retrieved July 25, 2002. Available online at: htlp://www.ecy.wa. og_v/programs/wq//plants/management/index.html Washington State Department of Ecology, 2004. Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) for Permitted use of Triclopyr. 115pp. Available online at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0410018.html Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 1995. Eurasian watermilfoil. In: Written Findings. Available online at: http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed info/milfoil.html Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 2001. Iris pseudacorus. In: Written Findings. Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 1997. Lythrum salicaria. In: Written Findings. Available online at: http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed info/ploosestrife.html Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 2001b. Nymphaea odorata. In: Written Findings. Westerdahl, H.E. and K.D. Getsinger(eds), 1988.Aquatic Plant Identification and Herbicide Use Guide; Volume L• Aquatic Herbicides and Application Equipment. Technical Report A-88-9, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, TAS. North Lake IAVMP 12/21/2004 65 APPENDIXA Appendix A documents the public involvement process during the development of the North Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan. Throughout this process,the Steering Committee made decisions based on input from and interactions with the wider community. Documents contained herein relate to planning and implementation of outreach and education activities including steering committee meeting agendas, meeting notes, flyers, and handouts. Documents appear in their original form, and have not been edited after the fact to reflect subsequent decisions or changes in the proposed project. As such, there are spelling and grammar errors, and varied document formats. North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A-1 3-17-04 North Lake Steering Committee meeting Attendees: Julie Cleary,Tom Jovanovich,Wendy Honey,Debra Hansen,Mark Braverman representing Weyerhaeuser and Beth Cullen representing The King County Lake Stewardship Program(2 hour meeting) Notes: • Need to apply State Grant for Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan • State Grant can sustain for a couple of years • Beth Cullen would be the project manager including handling funds • Weyerhaeuser has a permit for treating the Lilly pads for 2004 and plans to do treatment end of May • Look at Spring Lake model at http:Hdnr.metrokc.Rov • Watershed Grant for$2000 available on-line o Identify scope of work(Wendy to talk to Dr.Whitworth of Whitworth Pest Solutions) o Receiving this grant would help in getting the State grant o First step is to partner with Weyerhaeuser,community and King County o Need to chip in$$ o Ken Pritchard is grant coordinator o Need to get this in quickly after April 5 meeting • Application for State Grant needs to be completed before October o Kathy Hammil in charge of State Grants o Possibility of up to$50,000 o Again look at Spring Lake process • We agreed to try to get the lakeside residents to the monthly board meeting on April 5. Wendy to contact Lois(NLIC Secretary)about possibility. • HPA needed to pull out Lilies,Milfoil by hand. HPA free from King County North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A-2 4/01/04 North Lake Steering Committee Attendees: Debra Hanson,Wendy Honey,Julie Cleary(90 minute meeting) Meeting for April 5h with North Lake Community • How will we know if we have been successful with this meeting? o Vote of support and address concerns • What do we need to do in preparation for this meeting? o Distribute flyers o Coffee/tea o Set up club house o What else? ■ Sign in sheet with Name/Address/Phone/email • What do we want to accomplish? o Community support and education • Who is going to give an explanation of what we are trying to do and introduce Beth Cullen as a speaker? o Wendy Honey, Steering Committee Chairperson • Introduce Steering Committee members • Explain that we are starting a 7-1Oyear community maintenance to control our communities noxious and invasive weed/plant problem • Introduce Beth Cullen to speak on educating community on noxious and invasive weed/plant • Small Change Grant Writing o Handouts provided by King County o Who is going to do what by when? ■ Questions were assigned to Steering Committee members to draft and complete by 4/07/04(Wednesday) North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A-3 PLEASE JOIN US!! North Lakeside residents, we need your help in returning North Lake to a Clean, recreational lake to live and play on. Milfoil, Lilly pads and Purple Loosestrife are threatening the health of our lake. We need to take action. Please join us for a discussion and direction setting Date: April Where: North Lake Improvement Club Time: 7:15pm Speaker: Beth Cullen from King County Lake Stewardship Program We have an opportunity to participate in clean up by using the permit Weyerhaeuser has obtained to address the Lilly problem in May of 2004 and the possibility of a grant from King County. Your participation in direction setting is critical to a successful clean up. North Lake Steering Committee Julie Cleary (253)874-9138 Debra Hansen (253)927-7789 Wendy Honey (253)952-5283 Tom Jovanovich (253)874-8239 North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A-4 4/05/04 Speakers Notes(Wendy Honey) (attended by 31 residents including steering committee members 90 minute meeting) Thank neighbors for attending and support(include those not able to attend) Introduce Steering Committee: Julie Cleary,Debra Hansen,Tom Jovanovich,Wendy Honey Brief overview: • Began last year with conversations of the lily pads. Many neighbors have noticed and commented on increased lake weeds over the years. • Invited Beth Cullen and Katie Sauter Messick to talk with the North Lake Improvement Club Board members about weed control and funding options through grants • Our goal is to begin eradication of the non-native lily pads. Begin this process this spring. Count grant application for this process may be available. Cost is approximately$1500.00 in conjunction with Weyerhaeuser. Cost saving to begin now is$1050.00($250.00 per acre savings on treatment and shared permit) • Long term goal is to request a grant through the State Department of Ecology and develop an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan for our lake. 7-10 year process. This will result in controlling other noxious weeds such as the Milfoil,Purple Loosestrife,and Yellow Flag Iris. • Approximately 50 lakeside neighbors contacted over the weekend. 30(100%)that we were able to speak with gave their support o Support may come in the form of: Financial assistance Volunteer time • Introduce Beth Cullen, Water Quality Planner I Lake Stewardship Program,King County Water and Land Resources (206)263-6242/beth.cullenffinetrokc. og_v North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A-5 North Lake Steering Committee Wednesday May 5,2004 Discussion Items: Next Steps: Community Feedback: Grant Process: Task Delegation: Dan Smith,City of Federal Way: North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A-6 North Lake Steering Committee Wednesday May 5,2004 Attendees: Wendy Honey,Julie Cleary,Tom Jovanovich,Chuck Gibson,Beth Cullen (6:30pm-8:30pm 2 hour meeting) Discussion Items: The goal of the committee is to eradicate milfoil,lilies,loosestrife and iris. The first few years of the management plan will focus on herbicide treatments but begin to add diver surveys and resident monitoring to the plan Next Steps: Start aggressive eradication. Consider$20,000 a year for first couple of years for herbicide treatments. 3-4 years for control of non-native water lilies/Purple Loosestrife/Milfoil Educational grant may be available. Could we utilize the Boy Scouts for volunteers? 2"d stage-monitoring/hand pulling We need to consider obtaining at least: 10%cash matching/5%volunteer matching Community Feedback: All feedback from 4/05/2004 meeting positive and all committee members report positive feedback. No objections to the program mentioned. Grant Process: The King County grant to piggy-back on the lily control should be awarded by min-May Weyerhaeuser is waiting to hear about that grant before the contract begins IAVMP Grant available$60,000-$75,000 Due by October DOE grant contact: Kathy Hammil Neighboring Lakes Geneva,Killarney,and 5 mile have same problems with non-native and noxious weeds/plants Initial control of non-native water lilies will probably need 2 treatments of RODEO to be effective Need to develop letter of support and receive signatures for grant application Task Delegation: • Link for IAVMP • Draft budget • Community history-importance of North Lake to its residence,history of weeds,and previous treatments • Write Problem Statement-safety of waters,spreading to neighboring lakes,Goal is to eradiate non- native and noxious weeds and reintroduce native plants. Include undeveloped lake area in King County • Keep sign in sheets/agendas/time logs Other contacts: Dan Smith,City of Federal Way: Public Works, Surface Water Lake Management District. Discussion on weeds:results of King County dive survey: Native water lilies-shaped like ace of spades and stand up on waters surface. There are not many patches of these on North Lake. More fragrant non-native lilies Eurasian Milfoil-big puffy-leaflets-fluorescent bright. Northern is native-darker/olive green. Milfoil is everywhere in the lake. Early season for milfoil probably due to weather conditions Native Pond weed. Important Notes: Removing the lilies may increase milfoil. Lilies shade milfoil from sunlight/growth HPA Hydraulic Permit Approval is needed for hand pulling of weeds North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A-7 Monetary matches with Weyerhaeuser for match and budget timing. Weyerhaeuser may continue funding lake management Next meetings: Steering Committee May 24th Steering Committee June 14`h with Beth Cullen Watershed meeting June 28th North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A-8 5/24/04 Steering Committee Meeting Attendees: Wendy Honey,Julie Cleary,Debra Hansen,Tom Jovanovich, Chuck Gibson (6:30pm-8:OOpm 90 minutes) • Discuss planning and assign problem statement and lake history. • Who are our contact? o Long time residents Objective to have draft completed by next meeting. All committee members assigned a section to write. Circulate by email and each committee member will review and provide feedback. Next meeting: June 14th with Steering Committee members and Beth Cullen North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A-9 6/28/2004 Meeting Agenda Welcome-Neighbors Guests- Detrich and Glenda Jones,North Lake Residents Beth Cullen,Water Quality Planner,Lake Stewardship Program King County Water and Land Resources Mark Braverman, Site Forestry Manager for Weyerhaeuser Belinda Bowman,General Manager,Whitworth Pest Solutions Dan Smith,City of Federal Way Introduce Committee Members: Wendy Honey,Debra Hanson,Julie Cleary,Tom Jovanovich,Chuck Gibson Objective: To update the community on the Small Change Grant,water lilly eradication efforts currently taking place,and introduce IAVMP—Speaker Wendy Honey Small Change for a Big Difference Grant from King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks: North Lake Photo presentation: Whitworth Pest Solutions:update on 6/17 spray of Fragrant Water Lilies: Belinda Bowman Introduce IAVMP,Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan: IAVMP PowerPoint presentation: Beth Cullen Open floor for discussion and questions. Close meeting/Collect Letter of Support from each household attending North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A- 10 6/28/2004 Meeting Agenda (Speaker Notes: Wendy Honey) Welcome-Neighbors Guests- Dietrich and Glenda Jones,North Lake Residents Beth Cullen,Water Quality Planner,Lake Stewardship Program King County Water and Land Resources Mark Braverman, Site Forestry Manager for Weyerhaeuser Belinda Bowman,General Manager,Whitworth Pest Solutions Dan Smith,City of Federal Way Introduce Committee Members: Wendy Honey,Debra Hanson,Julie Cleary, Unable to attend: Tom Jovanovich,Chuck Gibson Objective: To update the community on the Small Change Grant,water lily eradication efforts currently taking place,and introduce IAVMP—Speaker Wendy Honey In June we received approval on the Small Change for a Big Difference Grant from King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks. This grant was for$2000.00 and allowed funding for the first stage of fragrant water lily eradication that took place on June 17,and 18th. This first stage seems to be a successful start as many of the fragrant water lilies are beginning to die. As this continues to happen,they may sink to the bottom and it is possible that some masses of them may rise and float. If they float onto your shoreline and it is more thank you can handle for cleaning up to recycle or compost, please contact a member of the Steering Committee and we will organize a work party to assist. We may need follow-up treatments as we get into the later summer months. In order to schedule future funding of this project, we need to determine the financial support. There is approximately$360.00 left from the grant funds,and we would need to ask residents to assist in funding. We can still use the Weyerhaeuser permit for future treatments, even if they are not in conjunction. It is important to mention that the Native Lilies were not sprayed as part of the eradication. The contractor was very careful not to spray these lilies and they will remain as part of the native habitat. North Lake PowerPoint presentation: Wendy Honey,photos of the lake during the water lily eradication efforts June 16th,June 17th,and June 24th. Whitworth Pest Solutions:update on 6/17 spray of Fragrant Water Lilies: Belinda Bowman Our next step: Introduce IAVMP,Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan: The grant application the Steering Committee is currently drafting. This grant is from the State Department of Ecology. The due date for the grant application is October 2004 for funding eradication project to begin in 2005. (Include request for matching funds both in kind and monetary) We are considering the first 3 years to be the most costly and are hoping to receive$100.00 per household in order to meet our match funds. We do need ongoing financial support from the homeowners as at some point,when funding has run out,we will be self funding to keep our lake free of the weeds that today infest the shoreline and water surface. We also receive credit for in kind North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A- 11 matches of time such as monitoring progress. To date the Steering committee has dedicated in excess of 100 hours to these projects. If you are working with any Steering Committee member on any project efforts,it is important that all time is logged for credit IAVMP PowerPoint presentation: Beth Cullen Open floor for discussion and questions. Close meeting with thanks and support/Collect Letter of Support from each household attending North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A- 12 7/26/04 Steering Committee Meeting Agenda Attendees: Tom Jovanovich,Julie Cleary,Debra Hansen,Chuck Gibson,Wendy Honey,Beth Cullen • Informational discussion on herbicides to consider: o Approximately 3-5 acres of milfoil 0 24D-higher toxicity-not for use in Salmon bearing streams Approx.Cost$600.00 per acre o Triclopere-less toxic-new approved approx.cost$1000.00 per acre-spot treat shallows o Map out Eurasian milfoil o Glysophate considered for Purple Loosestrife and yellow flag iris o Consider herbicide treatments matched with diver hand pulling o Discuss fabric barrier at the boat launch. Annual housekeeping o Need to set up lake patrol • Discuss further work on IAVMP application o How are we doing? On target! • Update on lake management fund o Need to get this account established. It was determined to request$50.00 from each lakeside resident. If we are able to collect 80%that would cover this year's expenses as well as a seed account for next year. • Discuss next RODEO application o To be applied by Whitworth Pest Solutions end of Aug or by Mid September. Approx.const $750.00 plus tax • Other items as needed: o Continue drafting IAVMP and working on application. o Get account established through NLIC treasurer, Simone • Next meeting after the first of September. North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A- 13 9/02/04 Steering Committee Meeting Attendees: Wendy Honey,Debra Hansen,Julie Cleary,Chuck Gibson (6:30pm-8:00pm 90minutes) Items to discuss: • Review our notes/comments on the draft IAVMP • Review and discuss the application document(Wendy is still working on this) o Draft answers and discuss format to use • Review the attachments for the IAVMP o Letter of support and signatures o Meeting agendas and notes o Correspondence from the Dept.of Fisheries(Larry T.is to be mailing this to Wendy) regarding Rotenone restoration of North Lake in 1950's-1970's o Community feedback(ANY?) Non reported Next step is to forward completed draft to Beth Cullen at King County with completed application,attachments, and disc of pictures of North Lake,history,and 2004 lily eradication progress. This will be sent by 9/04/2004. Next meeting to be determined North Lake IAVMP -Appendix A A- 14 APPENDIX B Appendix B contains a copy of the Letter of Support distributed at the watershed-wide community meeting. Prior to distributing the letter and the signature sheets at the end of the watershed-wide meeting on June 28, 2004, King County staff and the Steering Committee members presented full details of the proposed treatment strategy and answered questions from those present at the meeting. In addition to signatures of support gathered at the end of the meeting, several Steering Committee members took sheets with them so they could explain the proposal to their neighbors and have them sign if they supported the proposal. There are 54 signatures in support of the proposed treatment plan presented in detail at the watershed-wide meeting and summarized in the Letter of Support. North Lake IAVMP—Appendix B B-1 North Lake Noxious Weed Project Letter of Community Support June 28, 2004 By signing this letter,we, the members of the North Lake community, agree ❖ that Eurasian watermilfoil and other listed noxious aquatic weeds present a serious threat to the natural beauty, ecological integrity, and safe recreational activities on Spring Lake. ❖ that controlling the noxious weeds is an immediate priority and that ongoing monitoring and control should be a continuing priority into the future ❖ that community-based funding will be necessary to maintain a milfoil-free lake after initial eradication efforts ❖ that the proposed treatment strategy outlined below is reasonable but may be altered by experts at the Department of Ecology to achieve the greatest likelihood of success Recommended Treatment Strategy Initial Treatment (Year 1) Treat infested areas with 2, 4 D or triclopyr Diver hand-pulling Install bottom barrier at boat ramp Community education—milfoil ID and survey methods training Year 2 Diver surveys Triclopyr/2,4-D for spot control as necessary Diver hand-pulling and dredging as necessary Bottom barrier maintenance Continued community education Ongoing management Continued community education Community survey Diver survey Diver hand-pulling as necessary Bottom barrier maintenance North Lake IAVMP—Appendix B B-2 APPENDIX C Appendix C contains product labels from aquatic herbicide formulations that are included in the proposed treatment plan for aquatic noxious weeds at North Lake. These include the labels for two aquatic glyphosate products (Rodeo and Aquamaster), one granular 2,4-D BEE product(Navigate), and one liquid 2,4-D DMA product (DMA*4IVM). AquaKleen is essentially the same formulations as Navigate by a different manufacturer. A liquid formulation of triclopyr(Renovate 3) is also included as possible treatment for Eurasian watermilfoil. North Lake IAVMP—Appendix C C-1 APPENDIX D Appendix D contains some historical documents regarding work done on North Lake over the years. The Rotenone records were requested from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, documenting application since 1950. Records of King County Noxious Weed Control Galerucella beetle release forms for purple loosestrife control. This appendix concludes with the herbicide application notices from the Whitworth Pest Solutions distributed to the lakeside residents in the summer of 2004 for fragrant water lily control work. North Lake IAVMP—Appendix D D-1 NORTH LAKE Aquatic Weed Management Program 2005 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Author: Dan Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................................2 2.1 LAKE COMMUNITY HISTORY.........................................................................................................................2 2.2 1995 NORTH LAKE SURVEY..........................................................................................................................2 2.3 1996 WATER LILY TREATMENT....................................................................................................................3 2.3 NORTH LAKE 2002........................................................................................................................................3 2.4 NORTH LAKE 2003........................................................................................................................................3 2.5 NORTH LAKE 2004........................................................................................................................................4 3.0 DOE GRANT AGREEMENT......................................................................................................................5 4.0 NPDES AOUATIC NOXIOUS WEED PERMIT.......................................................................................6 5.0 2005 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES..........................................................................7 5.1 CONTRACT FOR AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT................................................................................7 5.2 INITIAL SYSTEMATIC SURVEY.......................................................................................................................7 5.2.1 Eurasian Watermilfoil.....................................................................................................................7 5.2.2 Fragrant Water Lily.........................................................................................................................8 5.2.3 Yellow Flag Iris................................................................................................................................8 5.2.4 Purple Loosestrife............................................................................................................................8 5.3 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS..............................................................................................................................9 5.3.1 Eurasian Watermilfoil Treatment...............................................................................................10 5.3.2 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment...................................................................................................10 5.3.3 Yellow Flag Iris Treatment..........................................................................................................11 5.3.4 Purple Loosestrife Treatment......................................................................................................11 5.4 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT.........................................................................................................12 5.5 SECOND SYSTEMATIC SURVEY...................................................................................................................13 5.6 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL..................................................................................................................15 5.7 BOTTOM BARRIER INSTALLATION...............................................................................................................16 5.8 WEED RAKES..............................................................................................................................................16 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................................................................16 6.1 2005 WATER QUALITY MONITORING..........................................................................................................16 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT...............................................................................................19 7.1 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT.......................................................................................................................19 7.1.1 First North Lake Meeting.............................................................................................................19 7.1.2 Formation of Steering Committee...............................................................................................20 7.1.3 Development of 2005 Work Plan................................................................................................20 7.1.4 Plant ID Workshop........................................................................................................................21 7.1.5 Boater Education...........................................................................................................................21 7.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION....................................................................................................................................22 7.2.1 Ouarterly Newsletter....................................................................................................................22 7.2.2 Public Notices................................................................................................................................22 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs......................................................................................................22 7.2.4 Web Page Development................................................................................................................23 7.2.5 Annual Report.................................................................................................................................23 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT 8.0 2005 BUDGET REVEIW............................................................................................................................23 8.1 TASKS 1 &2 BUDGET,PROJECT ADMINISTRATION/VEGETATION MANAGEMENT......................................24 8.2 TASK 3 BUDGET,PUBLIC EDUCATION.........................................................................................................24 9.0 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2006...................................................25 9.1 2005 EVALUATION......................................................................................................................................25 9.1.1 Aquatic Vegetation Management.................................................................................................25 9.1.2 Contract Mana em�ent...................................................................................................................25 9.1.3 Public Education............................................................................................................................25 9.1.4 Algae.................................................................................................................................................26 9.1.5 Other.................................................................................................................................................26 9.2 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2006...................................................................................................................26 9.2.1 Aquatic Vegetation Management.................................................................................................26 9.2.2 Contract Mana e�...................................................................................................................26 9.2.3 Public Education............................................................................................................................27 9.2.4 Algae.................................................................................................................................................27 9.2.5 Other.................................................................................................................................................27 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2005 North Lake 2,4-D Water Sampling............................17 Table 2. 2005 North Lake Glyphosate Water Sampling...................18 Table 3. 2005 North Lake Budget Overview..................................23 Table 4. 2005 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2..............................24 Table 5. 2005 North Lake Budget, Task 3......................................24 THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON SWM WEB PAGE (http://www.cityoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?page=1061) North Lake Grant Agreement 2005 WSDA Extension of Coverage 2005 DOE Aquatic Noxious Weed Control NPDES Permit AquaTechnex North Lake 2005 Year End Report 2005 North Lake YFI & PL Right of Entry Parcel Map NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way wishes to acknowledge the significant contribution provided by the members of the North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC). Through 2005, the members of the NLSC helped prioritize lake management activities, and provided input regarding the implementation of the annual work plan. The NLSC includes the following members: • Lake residents: Wendy Honey (Chairperson), Chuck Gibson (Co-Chair), Julie Cleary, Debra Hansen, Barry James, and James Chastain. • Weyerhaeuser is represented by Jennifer Hale and Alex Juchems. • Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Don Robinett (ESA & NPDES Coordinator). The backing of the City Council and City Manager is also appreciated. The collective support received by Surface Water Management staff — beginning with the acceptance of the Ecology Grant followed by approval to proceed with the request for proposals from aquatic weed management firms—helped move the project forward in a timely fashion. This project was made possible through the development of an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). King County staff developed the IAVMP, and applied for Aquatic Weeds Management Grant funding from the Department of Ecology in 2004. Recognition is awarded to the following individuals who were instrumental with these efforts: Kathy Hamel (Department of Ecology); Sally Abella (King County Water and Land Resources Division); and Beth Cullen (King County Water and Land Resources Division). NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT 1.0 INTRODUCTION The end of 2005 marks a very successful year in the continuing efforts to eradicate noxious aquatic weeds in North Lake. This annual report summarizes the steps taken by the Surface Water Management staff and the North Lake Steering Committee during 2005 to conform to the aquatic weed management program established in the 2004 Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP). The IAVMP is a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed control efforts in North Lake. The IAVMP also forms the basis for the scope of work outlined in the North Lake Aquatic Weeds Control Project Grant. This grant funding was offered to the city in 2005 by the Department of Ecology (DOE) through the Aquatic Weeds Management Fund(AWMF). Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, tend to be invasive, and pose a serious threat to our State's waterbodies such as North Lake if left unchecked. Because non-native plants have few natural controls in their new habitat, they spread rapidly, out-competing native plant and animal habitats, and degrading recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds has the potential to lower values of lakefront properties (Ecology, 2005). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; to contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur, and to prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major classes (A, B and C) are listed according to the seriousness of the threat they pose to the state, or a region of the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level, with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a County option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. 1 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT The joint efforts undertaken by the North Lake Steering Committee, lake residents, and SWM staff are described in this year-end report. The document also outlines the work completed to eradicate the following four noxious weed species detected in 2005: Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Eurasian watermilfoil Myriophyllum spicatum B Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria B Fragrant water lily Nymphaea spp. C Yellow flag iris Iris pseudacorus C 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 Lake Community History In 1942, the North Lake Improvement Club (NLIC) was formed with the goal to maintain and improve the waterbody. Since then, the club membership has been active in monitoring the development of the properties around North Lake, ensuring that improvements are consistent with the neighborhood desires. Up until incorporation by the City of Federal Way, the NLIC was a participant in the King County's Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program. By participating in the program on and off for approximately 19 years, the group demonstrated a significant commitment to the overall health of North Lake. There are presently 54 single-family homes primarily on the 55-acre lake, located primarily on the eastern shoreline. Weyerhaeuser owns most of the undeveloped property on the west side of the lake that contains approximately 52 acres of second growth forest. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) continues to own and operate the public boat launch located at the northwest side of the lake. 2.2 1995 North Lake Survey Under the King County Lake Stewardship program, a boat survey was conducted on North Lake in July of 1995. The lake's littoral zone was split into seven individual sections. Each section was then characterized by community type, species present,percent cover of community type and relative species density within a community type. Community types were defined as emergent, floating, or submergent. Among the nineteen aquatic plant species present, four noxious aquatic plants were identified. Fragrant water lily and purple loosestrife were each inhabiting all seven sections. Although yellow flag iris was detected, it's location was listed as "unidentified". 2 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT The plant Myriophyllum spp was also detected. (The abbreviation "spp." is used to denote species). Because it was not precisely identified, it is not known whether the 1995 survey is referring to an infestation of the noxious plant Myriophyllum spicatum (Eurasian watermilfoil) or the native milfoil species. Myriophyllum spp was found inhabiting all seven littoral zone sections. 2.3 1996 Water Lily Treatment To address the increasing populations of water lilies in North Lake, lakefront property owners contracted with an aquatic weed applicator to control the noxious weed in 1996. Two separate herbicide applications were made on the residential side of the lake. Treatment only took place in areas that individual property owners arranged to make payment directly to the contractor. Costing was determined by the amount of lake front footage treated. The control measure appeared to be successful, but was limited to only the east side of the lake. The lake residents intended for the contractor to return again the following year, but apparently the firm went out of business. 2.3 North Lake 2002 In 2002, two consulting firms, AquaTechnex and Envirovision Corporation,produced a Regional Eurasian Milfoil Control Plan for King County in 2002. North Lake was included as part of this county-wide lake survey effort that inspected only for milfoil. The survey for North Lake did not document the presence of Eurasian water milfoil. Also in 2002, personnel from King County Noxious Weed Control Program released approximately 200-300 beetles (Galerucella calmariensis) at the boat launch in August in an effort to build a population of bugs that might control the spread of purple loosestrife (PL). Several years were planned for this control measure before any desired results would become evident. 2.4 North Lake 2003 The King County Noxious Weed Control Board requires property owners to control and prevent the spread of PL (Class B species) on private and public lands throughout the county. In 2003, King County assisted North Lake residents with the containment of PL infestations through the program that helps homeowners to implement actions to stop seed production using manual control efforts. Each noxious weed species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority for King County. Where Class B species are already abundant, control is decided at the local level, with containment being the primary goal. 3 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT In 2003, King County provided public education to all lake residents concerning the control of PL. In addition, the program also offered residents vouchers toward proper disposal of the plant waste for those willing to participate. Following evaluation of the 2002 beetle release, no visible damage was noted to purple loosestrife colonies. Beetles were again released (approximately 400-500) by King County staff in July of 2003 at the boat launch. Despite these control efforts, the plant was reported to increase in density. 2.5 North Lake 2004 The North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) was formed in early 2004 and began a concerted effort to begin a formal aquatic plant management program in the early part of the year. The Steering Committee partnered with Weyerhaeuser representatives and King County Lake Stewardship personnel to begin this process. King County Lake Stewardship staff and a member of the King County Noxious Weed Program conducted a preliminary survey in the spring of 2004. The survey characterized the aquatic weed populations throughout the entire littoral zone of the lake. The effort was completed by a three- person team(one in the boat, and two divers). The following is an outline of the 2004 survey: • Several floating fragments of milfoil were found in the lake, along with a few scattered rooted milfoil plants. The majority of the milfoil infestation was found at the boat launch on the north end of the lake. • Fragrant waterlily was covering the majority of the littoral zone and was reported to be spreading into the middle of the lake. • Purple loosestrife was noted as having colonized the shoreline • Yellow flag iris was also documented to have colonized the lake's shoreline. A short-term strategy to control fragrant water lily during the 2004 growing season was developed. The NLSC and Weyerhaeuser devised a plan to work together to treat the majority of the existing fragrant water lily infestation on the lake. The herbicide treatment would be performed by Whitworth Pest Solutions (a local contractor working under an agreement with Weyerhaeuser). In addition, the work would be covered under Weyerhaeuser's Noxious Weed Permit. Because treatment would now include areas along the residential shoreline, the expanded scope would require an additional funding source. The funding came in the form of a $2,000 Small Change for a Big Difference grant from the King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks (KCDNRP). This grant allowed a more extensive fragrant water lily herbicide treatment program to take place in North Lake. Whitworth treated approximately ten (10) acres of fragrant water lily on the Weyerhaeuser side of the lake; and approximately three (3) acres on the residential side. The work required two 4 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT separate applications of glyphosate (RODEO) to effectively eradicate the targeted areas of infestation. In order to be considered for future grant funding from Department of Ecology (DOE), a long- term strategy for developing an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP) was planned. In addition, it was also reasoned that an Ecology-approved IAVMP would be necessary to receive DOE Noxious Weed Permit coverage (a requirement if herbicides are to be applied to the lake). With assistance from the NLSC, King County Lake Stewardship staff began developing the IAVMP. Concurrently, the options for grant funding from the DOE Aquatic Weeds Management Fund(AWMF) were explored. A series of meetings were held throughout the summer in order to gather public comment, and to finalize the IAVMP. Anticipating future annexation by the City of Federal Way, Surface Water Management staff were brought into the process. The King County (KC) Noxious Weed Control Program continued to support the purple loosestrife control efforts on North Lake. The KC Program pledged a maximum of $1,000 for treatment of purple loosestrife during the first full year of IAVMP implementation (2005). The IAVMP was submitted on September 16, 2004. DOE issued final approval for the plan on October 8. With an approved IAVMP, application was made to DOE for a long-term AWMF grant(King County listed as the recipient of the funding). The grant application proposed a multi-year effort to fully eradicate milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The plan included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education. The proposal grant budget totaled approximately$80,000. During the year, lake residents continued to participate in purple loosestrife control and disposal through the program managed by the King County Noxious Weed Control Board. 3.0 DOE GRANT AGREEMENT Early in 2005, the North Lake community officially became incorporated into the City of Federal Way. As a result, DOE provided the city a draft of the Aquatic Weeds Management Fund (AWMF) Grant Agreement that was modified by SWM staff. Following internal review by legal staff, a final version of the Grant Agreement was submitted to DOE. On January 20, the Department of Ecology formally offered the City of Federal Way funding for the North Lake Aquatic Weeds Control Project through the Aquatic Weeds Management Fund (AWMF). The application for this project was one of twelve state-wide projects selected for funding. DOE offered the city up to 75 percent of the eligible project costs. 5 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT The Grant Agreement was formally initiated on May 26 totaling $80,210, with a 25 percent ($20,052) of in-kind contributions and cash matching funds. The Agreement (htip://www.cityoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?page=1061) is scheduled to expire no later than December 31, 2009. The Scope of Work is broken out into the following four tasks: Task 1 —Project Administration/Management Task 2—Vegetation Management Task 3 —Public Education Task 4—Reporting Task 1 (Project Administration/Management) involves the maintenance of project records; submittal of payment vouchers, fiscal forms and project reports; compliance with procurement and contracting requirements; attainment of all permits, licenses, easements of property rights; and submittal of all required performance items. Task 2 (Vegetation Management) and Task 3 (Public Education) are action items specifically required by this agreement, and are outlined and described in the 2005 North Lake Work Plan. Task 4 (Reporting) involves the preparation of a final report summarizing the actions taken during the entire period of the Grant Agreement. 4.0 NPDES AQUATIC NOXIOUS WEED PERMIT Coverage under a general NPDES Aquatic Noxious Weed Permit is required for all noxious weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. The permitting agency is the Washington State Department of Ecology(DOE). Discharges from aquatic weed control and eradication activities may contain pollutants in excessive amounts that have a reasonable potential to cause, or contribute to, violations of state water quality standards. Violations may be due to the presence of toxic materials (herbicides) or may result from the effects of dying vegetation (low oxygen levels). DOE has determined through a risk assessment that, when properly applied and handled in accordance with the terms and conditions of the general permit, aquatic weed control and eradication activities will: comply with state water quality standards; will maintain and protect the existing characteristic beneficial uses of the surface waters of the state; and will protect human health(Ecology, 2005). The 2005 permit process required that the Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) obtain coverage under the NPDES Noxious Weed Permit from DOE. Under contract with WSDA, the city agreed to comply with all terms, conditions, and requirements described in the DOE Aquatic Noxious Weed Permit(http://www.cityoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?page=1061). 6 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT 5.0 2005 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 5.1 Contract for Aquatic Vegetation Management On February 28, the City of Federal Way Land Use and Transportation Committee recommended that the City Manager authorize the Surface Water Utility to prepare and advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP) for aquatic vegetation management for both Steel Lake and North Lake. Action was approved by City Council on March 15, 2005. Following a review of submitted proposals, a two-year (2005 to 2006) Professional Services Agreement (contract) was executed between the City of Federal Way and AquaTechnex to perform aquatic plant management activities in Steel Lake and North Lake pursuant to the Scope of Services contained therein. 5.2 Initial Systematic Survey On June 21, 2005, AquaTechnex performed the first part of the initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake. On this day the survey team operated from a mapping vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), to record the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake. A boat survey was performed to map submerged, floating, and emergent noxious weeds. Observations of milfoil populations, if visible, were made from the vessel. Although the initial survey detected Najas sp. and Chara as the primary native vegetation the team decided that additional native plant colonies would most likely be found during the second survey (see Section 5.5 for more detailed native plant information). The second part of the initial survey resumed on June 27, utilizing a diver team to perform a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. In addition to making a visual inspection, a number of rake samples were collected at various GPS points. These points were collected to define each treatment area through diver communication to the mapping vessel team. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. The following is a discussion regarding the noxious weeds found during the initial survey. More detailed information and maps may be found in the 2005 AquaTechnex North Lake 2005 Year End Report(http://www.cityoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?page=1061). 5.2.1 Eurasian Watermilfoil The initial survey presented a complicated situation due to the lack of any known milfoil treatments. As a result, milfoil plants were distributed throughout the littoral area in the northern and central part of the lake. While there were no plants observed in the south basin, it was deemed likely that milfoil fragments had probably dispersed into this area, and would emerge as viable plants in the future. 7 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT The areas of milfoil infestation were estimated to be ten (10) acres in size. AquaTechnex agreed with the IAVMP and recommended aquatic herbicide to target this species. The contractor noted the possibility for additional herbicide treatments later in the summer if the second survey detected surviving milfoil plants. 5.2.2 Fragrant Water Lily The initial survey located fragrant water lily growth in the North Lake system representative of one-year post treatment. Some areas displayed obvious misses and skips in treatment from the prior year, such as a linear patch to the right of the public access boat launch. More common were scattered lily colonies emerging in areas where there had been dense lily growth the previous year. The contractor recommended targeting this species as necessary based on discussions with the City, and the requirements outlined in the DOE Grant Agreement that specified complete eradication using glyphosate. The creation of water lily "mud islands" was also discussed. These structures generally occur where large areas of lilies have been treated and the sediments are organic or peat in nature. As the plants die, the decomposition of the roots and rhizomes can cause these areas to lift to the surface and float for some time. These islands can also move around the lake. Due to the extensive 2004 treatment of lilies, a number of these islands were located in the south end of the lake. The features of these islands were mapped, but the contractor noted that some of the features would change based upon their potential mobility. 5.2.3 Yellow Flag Iris The initial survey indicated yellow flag iris (YFI) to be scattered along the shoreline in a number of locations. The species was reported by AquaTechnex to be relatively easy to control. The contractor recommended using glyphosate, an aquatic herbicide that provides an effective long- term control of this weed. Applications are generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide into the root system, insuring longer-term control. A plan was devised by SWM staff to obtain permission from landowners around the lake to treat this weed. The proposed control action involved herbicide application to YFI on those properties where permission was granted(see Public Notices, section 7.2.2). 5.2.4 Purple Loosestrife An aquatic plant survey provides a snapshot of the conditions present in the lake at the time of the survey. As the summer progresses,purple loosestrife(PL) seedlings can emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines. PL was observed at North Lake during the initial June survey. As with YFI, PL was reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake. It was determined that the survey would resume in early July when the plant flowers. The contractor noted that any mapping completed 8 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT prior to flowering may lead to errors and omissions in areas where the weed is mixed with dense native wetland plant communities. This would be especially true where there are a significant number of seedlings present. 5.3 Herbicide Treatments The herbicide treatment program was designed to meet the requirements of both the DOE Grant Agreement and NPDES permit. Within this framework, Year 1 Integrated Treatment Plan benchmarks were followed where practical. The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities into water bodies that are contiguous with rivers, creeks, and lakes; or into navigable waters. The applicator must also comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (either Rodeo or AquaPRO) was used to treat fragrant water lily, yellow flag iris and purple loosestrife on North Lake in 2005. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) for aquatic applications. The active ingredient in glyphosate moves through the plant from the point of foliage contact into the root system. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within 2 to 4 days, 7 days on more on most perennial weeds, and 30 days or more on most woody plants. Extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects include gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which will advance to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a fast-acting systemic herbicide effective in removing targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • It's application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. 2,4-D DMA4*IVM was the post-emergent aquatic herbicide chosen to control milfoil on North Lake in 2005. DMA4*IVM (active ingredient 2,4-D) is a systemic herbicide registered by the USEPA for freshwater applications. Herbicides containing 2,4-D can be effectively used for spot-treatment programs in lakes. Effectiveness of the treatment is dependent upon the timing of the application and density of the target plant community. Following application, the targeted plants begin to show signs of injury in approximately two weeks, followed by plant breakdown and death. 9 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT The advantages of 2, 4-D include: • It is a fast-acting systemic herbicide, effective in removing selected plants (especially milfoil) with little to no impact on native plants at labeled rates. • The application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area. • Treated waters can be used for swimming following a 24 hour advisory. • There are no fish consumption restrictions. 5.3.1 Eurasian Watermilfoil Treatment Based upon the initial survey results, approximately ten (10) acres of lake area were infested with Eurasian Watermilfoil. The areas of the lake targeted for milfoil herbicide treatment using 2,4-D are illustrated in the AquaTechnex North Lake 2005 Year End Report. Application of 2,4-D was completed on August 2. 2,4-D (DMA4*IVM) was injected into the water column (at the rate specified) directly over the submerged milfoil plant populations. The herbicide was applied from a motorboat equipped with a 50 gallon spray tank connected to an array of weighted drop hoses. The treatment areas were applied with 2,4-D at a rate of 7-gallons per acre, for a concentration of 2.0 ppm. A total of 70 gallons of herbicide was used for this treatment. 5.3.2 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All fragrant water lily colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication pursuant to the requirements outlined in the DOE Grant Agreement. Complete eradication would allow for the gradual replacement of native vegetation in treated areas over time. This is an important step toward fish habitat preservation that will improve boater access and provide safer recreation opportunities. Because the treatment areas were smaller than in 2004, the potential for extensive floating mud island formation was expected to be less likely. In addition, defined treatment of water lily colonies would achieve the following: • The gradual replacement of native vegetation over time to preserve and improve fish habitat. • A reduction in the likelihood that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would contribute to increased nutrient loading(resulting in algae blooms). • A reduction in the likelihood that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would place a demand on dissolved oxygen, thereby stressing aquatic life. The areas designated for white water lily treatment are illustrated in the AquaTechnex North Lake 2005 Year End Report. Glyphosate(Rodeo), a liquid,was applied directly on the lily pads by a two-person crew using boat- mounted low-pressure spray equipment. The aquatic herbicide and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank to achieve a 1.75 percent solution, and applied (by licensed applicators) uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process was repeated a second time to 10 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT touch up any areas that did not uptake a sufficient amount of enough herbicide. The individual treatment areas totaled approximately one-and-one-half(1.5) acre. The first glyphosate application of fragrant water lily was conducted on August 2. The weather was sunny, but the application was suspended later in the afternoon due to windy conditions. A second application was attempted the morning of August 10. Due to precipitation, wind and wave action, this application effort was ended in mid-morning. By August 15, areas of treatment were evidenced by the appearance of yellow and brown lily pads on the surface of the lake. AquaTechnex visited the lake a third time on August 26 to complete glyphosate touch-up treatment of the surviving water lily colonies. (To effectively eradicate white water lily populations, it is characteristic to perform a second treatment during the growing season). 5.3.3 Yellow Flag Iris Treatment Yellow flag iris (YFI) colonies were treated by a licensed applicator using glyphosate. The noxious weeds were either sprayed from the lake-side from a motorboat, or from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex was careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses. The aquatic herbicide and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank to achieve a 1.75 percent solution, and applied in the same fashion as fragrant water lily. The individual YFI-treated areas, identified on the 2005 North Lake YFI Right of Entry Parcel Map (http://www.cityoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?page=1061), totaled less than 0.25 acres. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete the YFI work from the land-side of the lake. The AquaTechnex North Lake 2005 Year End Report shows the locations of all yellow flag iris (YFI) infestations identified in the initial survey. The first application of glyphosate to YFI colonies began on the morning of August 10, but wind and rain caused the effort to conclude before midday. AquaTechnex returned on August 16, and completed the remainder of work that was accessible by motorboat. The final treatment of YFI took place on August 26 when the crew, using an airboat, finished up areas of the lake that were more difficult to access. 5.3.4 Purple Loosestrife Treatment Glyphosate was also used to control purple loosestrife (PL) colonies. The Vegetation Management Plan, outlined in the DOE Grant Agreement, required"wicking"each PL plant with herbicide to achieve desired results. On August 10, the AquaTechnex crew was observed spraying both PL and YFI colonies. The spraying efforts were implemented in a fashion that took care not to impact native, and/or desirable plants. As with yellow flag iris treatment, some of the emergent noxious weeds (PL) were treated directly from a motorboat from the lake-side. The hard to reach areas were treated 11 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT from the land-side by crew, and individually wicked and/or directly sprayed using a backpack unit. SWM staff informed the crew that "wicking" was the preferred DOE method (per Grant Agreement) for treating PL with herbicide on North Lake. On August 16, AquaTechnex returned with equipment to wick the remaining PL plants on the residential side of the lake (east shore) that were easily accessible from land. Terry McNabb with AquaTechnex consulted with Kathy Hamel, Department of Ecology, concerning the pros and cons of wicking. It was determined that wicking would be more effective in the treatment of monocultures (single PL plants) where they were easily accessible; and either method could be used (spraying or wicking) as long as the techniques used were proven to be effective given the issues of work efficiency and accessibility. On August 26 the crew used an airboat to mobilize to the remaining areas of the lake that were difficult to access (primarily Weyerhaeuser property on the west shore). Here, the PL plants were sprayed with herbicide. The aquatic herbicide and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank to achieve a 1.75 percent solution, and applied in the same fashion as that for YFL The individual PL-treated areas, identified on the 2005 North Lake PL Right of Entry Parcel Map, totaled less than 0.25 acres. Following the herbicide application, SWM staff sent out notices to lake residents regarding PL seed head removal to help prevent the propagation of new plants. Flyers described methods that homeowner could undertake to cut off, bag up, and dispose of PL seed heads. Fourteen residents contributed 44 volunteer hours removing PL seed heads and disposing of the plant waste. 5.4 Post Control Visual Assessment On September 1, an AquaTechnex biologist/diver team returned to North Lake to determine the effectiveness of the 2,4-D and glyphosate herbicide treatments. Through visual inspection and plant grab sampling, the viability of the four targeted species (milfoil, fragrant water lily,YFI, and PL) were assessed by the biologist. Eurasian Milfoil responded very well to the Dow DMA 4 IVM application. At two weeks and at four weeks post treatment the target vegetation showed injury symptoms and dropped out of the water column. The first application to fragrant water lily was noted to be chiefly effective, but there were some areas where weather caused the herbicide to be washed off the plants. Results were excellent where the herbicide was re-applied in missed areas. YFI takes a slightly longer duration for control to be evident. At the time of the visual assessment, all of the treated areas showed advanced symptoms of glyphosate injury, with control expected to be in excess of 95%. 12 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT Targeted purple loosestrife plants responded very well to the herbicide treatment. In all cases, the plants showed injury symptoms in a two-week time frame, and were dead by four weeks post treatment. 5.5 Second Systematic Survey The second survey was performed on August 15 to document the presence of native aquatic weeds. The objective was to quantify the vegetation present and to provide a continued baseline of the condition of the plant communities. DOE protocol was utilized for the survey (the collection of at least one sampling point per acre of littoral area in the lake). A rake is tossed at each sampling point around the lake as determined along selected transects. The survey ended up generating four points along each of 22 transects, for a total of 88 sampling points. A biologist separated and identified the collected plants by species at each site, and logged the points into a GPS database. The information was returned to the mapping laboratory and processed, where the points and the associated species were converted into shape files. Maps were then created that illustrated the frequency and location of each species detected. The species observed during this sampling effort were: Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Muskgrass Chara sp. Native Water nymph Najas sp. Native Big leaf pondweed Potamogeton Amplifoious Native Slender leaf pondweed Potamogeton filiformis Native Common waterweed Elodea Canadensis Native Fanwort Cabomba caroliniana B Also observed, but not present at any of the sampling sites was Potamogeton illinoensis and Utricularia. P. illinoensis was located in deeper water along the 10 foot contour in scattered small patches from the Public Access south along the west shoreline to where the lake narrows prior to the south basin. Utricularia was noted in two small locations mixed in the water lilies on the west shoreline in the south basin. There were also a few locations in the lake where the native yellow water lily (Nuphar polysepala) were observed. Plant population locations are displayed on maps in the AquaTechnex North Lake 2005 Year End Report. The dominant species observed through the point sampling protocols and through visual observation was Najas sp. This native aquatic plant was present at 56 of 88 sampling points and was observed at many locations between these transects. Najas sp. (or Naiad) is an annual aquatic plant. It reproduces from seed each year unlike most other aquatic plants that are perennials. It generally will grow rapidly in the spring, produce seeds and drop the seeds to the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank will develop and this weed can expand to the point of excluding other native plants as well as causing a weed problem in shallower areas of the lake. 13 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT The second most dominant species in the lake was Potamogeton amplifolious. This native member of the Pondweed family occurred in small clumps where sampled. It also was observed in some areas throughout the remaining littoral areas in similar density. It occurred at 5 of 88 sampling sites. The third most dominant species in the lake is Cabomba caroliniana, a state of Washington Class B Weed. This plant can be invasive and it not native to this region. It was sampled at 5 of 88 sites in the southern portion of the lake. This plant should be carefully monitored from this point forward to insure it does not become a weed problem in this system. Although Cabomba has developed into a major weed problem in a number of lakes in the southeastern United States, it has caused limited problems in this region(see Note below). The fourth most dominant species in the lake was Potamogeton filiformis, occurring at 2 of 88 sampling locations. This plant occurred sporadically elsewhere in the littoral area of the lake, as did Potamogeton Amplifoious. Elodea was the fifth most dominate species in the lake, occurring at 2 of 88 sampling locations. This plant also occurred sporadically elsewhere in the littoral area of the lake. Chara is a macro algae and is generally considered very beneficial. This plant is low growing and will occupy space on the lake bottom without in most cases posing a weed problem to lake users. Chara was found at 2 of 88 sampling points and is not considered dominant at this point. NOTE: Native milfoil was also observed in North Lake by SWM staff and residents, but was not included in the AquaTechnex plant survey. Because of the possible existence of another noxious weed species (Cabomba caroliniana), and due to possible plant identification confusion with native milfoil, a brief survey was performed late in the season. On January 6, 2006, SWM staff and King County Noxious Weed Specialist Roy Brunskill performed a cursory lake survey in an attempt to locate native milfoil and/or Cabomba caroliniana. A few surviving native milfoil were located at both the north end and south end of the lake. This aquatic plant was tentatively identified from an emailed image as Myriophyllum hippuroides by Jennifer Parsons, DOE. This native species (Western milfoil)provides habitat and food to aquatic animal species. Due to these findings, SWM and King County will use the GPS coordinates generated by AquaTechnex to either confirm or refute the existence of Cabomba caroliniana early during the 2006 growing season. If detected, an action plan can be developed to combat this invasive noxious weed. AquaTechnex reported that approximately 35 percent of the lake bottom is covered with native aquatic vegetation. These species are generally fairly low growing in the water column and will not pose a weed problem except in shallower waters. The dominant species in this area are Naiad; with very small patches of the pondweed species and elodea. In their professional opinion, these species are not interfering with the beneficial uses 14 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT of the lake at this point; but some areas could benefit from native plant control efforts in future years should they continue to expand. 5.6 Water Lily Island Control Following water lily treatment in 2004, North Lake witnessed the emergence of floating masses of roots and muck, primarily along the south shore. The Steering Committee discussed water lily island removal options during the preparation of the 2005 Work Plan. Because of unknowns, a budget figure necessary to fund such action was not established. Although mud island removal is action approved and funded by the DOE Grant for North Lake, no firm methods were adopted by the Steering Committee concerning this type of work. In addition, there is no known reliable methodology in the aquatic weed management industry for mud island removal. During a number of visits throughout the summer, AquaTechnex surveyed the extent and nature of the mud islands. On August 26, a crew pushed some of the larger masses at the south end with an airboat in an attempt to determine their potential for mobility. On September 1, during the Post Control Visual Survey, a diver assessed the thickness of these masses. Following these exercises to evaluate the mud island situation, SWM staff requested a scope of work from AquaTechnex. It was expected that control methods selected would be refined over time as field experience is obtained. The following outlines the initial thoughts regarding the problem: • Following the exercise with the airboat, it was determined that lower tech approaches (hand work or grappling with hooks and anchors) would not be efficient and cost effective to impact these larger"beached"masses. • A harvester, in combination with hydro-blasting, could be a method employed to remove and transport the muck and dead vegetation in selected areas in order to gain lake access for affected property owners. In this case, WDFW approval would have to be obtained due to work being conducted outside of the timing window established by the WDFW Aquatic Plants & Fish pamphlet. For this method, waste disposal options would also have to be explored. • If the harvester was not successful, larger equipment could be employed. This would involve greater expense. During this period, Chuck Gibson, lake resident, accumulated over 21 volunteer hours performing manual hand-work on the floating masses. His work created a narrow channel from the lake to the shoreline. This action caused some larger sections of the floating mass to drop out where the cross section of the material was thin, but was not entirely successful in mitigating the problem. In October of 2005, SWM staff requested an exception from WDFW to conduct mud island removal outside of the timing window specified within the WDFW Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet. After several rounds of communication, WDFW determined that a formal HPA would be required to due to downstream habitat concerns. 15 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT Upon review of the HPA application, WDFW notified SWM staff that given the proposed scope of work, a HPA would not be required if the work was carried out between October 15th and May 15th. This notice was received on December 2, 2005. However, since the time of HPA submittal, SWM staff has decided to delay island removal until July of 2006, when the habitat window re-opens. Water lily island removal will be included as a scope of work item for 2006 and may be planned to be completed as a volunteer effort. If warranted, the contractor may be requested to perform the work using mechanical equipment where necessary. 5.7 Bottom Barrier Installation The DOE Grant Agreement included the requirement for bottom barrier installation in the winter of 2005 at the public boat launch area to deter the invasion of milfoil into the lake. A bottom barrier covers the sediment like a blanket, compressing aquatic plants while reducing or blocking light. In addition to controlling nuisance weeds, bottom screening has become an important tool to help eradicate and contain early infestations of noxious weeds such as milfoil. Bottom barrier installation, although a 2005 Work Plan item, was not completed this year. Efforts to immediately perform aquatic plant surveys and to begin herbicide treatment were given top priority to control the current noxious weed infestations. To meet the Grant Agreement timetable, this control measure is planned to be completed before the onset of the 2006 growing season. 5.8 Weed Rakes Two styles of weed rakes were purchased in 2005. One is used for floating plants and algae; and one is designed for submerged weeds. They were not offered for resident use because lake surveys were initiated late in the season; and also due to the presence of noxious weed species. The Committee could not begin the weed rake loan program until the lake community had adequate information to determine whether noxious weeds were present in the area they were planning on raking. Because herbicide treatments did not take place until late July, and post visual inspections of the treatment efficiency did not occur until September 1, weed rakes were not provided for lake resident use in 2005. 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING 6.1 2005 Water Quality Monitoring Per the DOE Grant Agreement, SWM Water Quality personnel collected samples from North Lake to determine both glyphosate and 2,4-D concentrations before and after treatment. The 16 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT sampling procedure was undertaken to determine lake concentrations of herbicides and to provide an analytical measurement of the contractor's performance. Background samples (before treatment) and post treatment samples were collected at time intervals prescribed in the Grant Agreement. Samples were taken in the middle of the lake (outside the treatment areas), and inside the two individual treatment sites: one for fragrant water lily(glyphosate) and one for milfoil (2,4-D). All samples were collected using a Wildco Alpha 2.2 liter Van Dorn style water bottle. The samples were retrieved from various depths and combined into individual composite samples. Samples were chilled and delivered the same day to Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc. (STL Seattle). Sampling times were adjusted to accommodate weekends and staff schedules. 2,4-D samples were analyzed by STL (DOE accredited laboratory #C1226) using USEPA Chromatography Method 8151 GUMS Modified. Glyphosate samples were submitted to STL, and subcontracted to Coffey Labs in Portland through Edge Analytical in Burlington. Coffey Labs (DOE accredited laboratory #C1264) used USEPA Chromatography Method 547. Tables 1 and 2 below outline the results of the sampling. Table 1. 2005 North Lake 2,4-D Water Sampling Date Pre/Post Inside/Outside Location Concentration(ppb) Treatment Zone 7/21/05 Pre Inside In littoral zone,approximately 300'south of Non Detect public boat launch 7/21/05 Pre Outside In middle of lake,approximately 200'from Non Detect outer edge of expected treatment plot,directly west of 3610 S.334th St. 8/3/05 Post Inside In littoral zone,approximately 300'south of 330 24-hours public boat launch 8/8/05 Post Inside In littoral zone,approximately 300'south of 188 6-days public boat launch 17 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT Table 2. 2005 North Lake Glyphosate Water Sampling Date Pre/Post Inside/Outside Location Concentration(ppb) Treatment Zone 7/21/05 Pre Inside In littoral zone,approximately 700'south of Non Detect public boat launch 7/21/05 Pre Outside In littoral zone,approximately 700'south of Non Detect public boat launch,immediately adjacent to expected treatment plot 8/2/05 Post Inside In littoral zone,approximately 700'south of 19 1-hour public boat launch 8/3/05 Post Inside In littoral zone,approximately 700'south of Non Detect 21-hours public boat launch The following outlines several key sample result observations: • Specific use directions from the EPA label establish application concentrations for 2,4-D DMA4*fVM of 2,000 to 4,000 ppb for treatment of submerged aquatic weeds (including Eurasian watermilfoil). • 2,4-D samples remained above the EPA drinking water standard of 70 ppb (0.07 ppm) for at least six days (no additional sampling was conducted after 6 days). • By day-six, the results were near the EPA irrigation water restriction of 100 ppb (0.1 ppm). • Note that post treatment sampling did not occur outside of the treatment zones. The analytical findings, combined with observations made during the Post Control Visual Assessment, indicate that 2,4-D and glyphosate were applied in sufficient concentrations to achieve the intended results. In addition, there were no reports of damage to lawns or gardens from irrigated water. Water quality monitoring at several other Washington lakes in 2004 (Steel, Sacheen, Hideaway, Washington) and 2005 (Serene) indicated that 2,4-D DMA4*fVM also persisted for some time at detectable concentrations post treatment (Ecology, 2005). From an aquatic weed control aspect this is good — milfoil is more effectively impacted by the herbicide. Although the lake is not a source of drinking water, the city recommended an additional 24-hour wait (for a total of 96- hours)until using treated water for domestic irrigation purposes. 18 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The elements of the Education and Public Involvement Program for North Lake are based primarily on the IAVMP— a dynamic document initially prepared by King County staff in 2004. The DOE Grant Agreement incorporates the information in the IAVMP, and forms two primary components for Education and Public Involvement (which are also mirrored by the 2005 North Lake Work Plan). The two components focus on prevention and detection of noxious aquatic and emergent weeds, and lake stewardship. 7.1 Community Involvement North Lake Community Involvement program for 2005 involved the following: 7.1.1 First North Lake Meeting The North Lake Community Meeting was held on March 16, 2004 at City Hall. SWM staff outlined the proposed 2005 Work Plan, the DOE Grant, and the Noxious Weed Permit requirements. Various questions from lake residents were addressed and citizen feedback was solicited. The meeting was attended by approximately 16 lake residents. The North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) was also elected at this public meeting. The following NLSC members were appointed by a majority vote of the lake community residents in attendance: Lake Residents Wendy Honey—(Chair) * James Chastain Chuck Gibson—(Co-Chair)* Julie Cleary Debra Hansen Barry James * Appointed to their respective positions on April 21,2005 Weyerhaueser Representitives ** Jennifer Hale Alex Juchems **Lake residents and SWM staff agreed to make a Committee position available to a Weyerhaueser Representitive City of Federal Way Dan Smith, Surface Water Management Don Robinett, Surface Water Management Per the consensus of the North Lake Steering Committee, the Annual Spring Meeting was waived for 2005. In lieu of a Spring Meeting, a copy of the proposed 2005 Work Plan was mailed to all lake residents requesting comments. 19 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT Z 1.2 Formation of Steering Committee The NLSC is charged with setting the lake management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. The NLSC is comprised of North Lake Improvement Club members,Weyerhaeuser representatives, and Surface Water Management staff. The following outline includes, but is not limited to, the responsibilities of the NLSC: • Reviews annual plant survey information. • Develops an annual aquatic plant management Work Plan based upon the information revealed in the annual plant surveys. The Work Plan prioritizes aquatic weed problem areas, identifies preferred control methods for each species, and develops the anticipated budget. • Assists the City of Federal Way with oversight of control work to keep contractors accountable. • Participates in preparation of an annual evaluation report that summarizes plant control activities, lake user's perspectives on the plant community, and recommendations for the next year's control strategy. • Assists with presentation of aquatic plant management efforts to lake residents at an annual community meeting and Plant ID Workshop. • Helps the City of Federal Way to ensure that all lake residents receive proper notification pursuant to the requirements of the NPDES Noxious Weed Permit. • Determines and participates in other annual community involvement/education strategies and plant control efforts as needed. The NLSC met two times in 2005. The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the web page devoted to North Lake publications at (http://www.cityoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?page=713). The following are brief abstracts from each NLSC meeting: April 21 — The group met at the North Lake Club House to discuss several topics, including but not limited to: Boater/Milfoil Education, Role of Committee Members and the 2005 Work Plan. .Tule 14 — The NLSC met in City Council Chambers to review the results of the Initial Aquatic Plant Survey conducted in June, treatment strategies and recommendations, and tracking volunteer time for DOE grant. The meeting was also used for a joint session with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee to coordinate the Plant ID Workshop. 7.1.3 Development of 2005 Work Plan On April 21, the NLSC discussed both the structure and content of the 2005 North Lake Aquatic Plant Management Draft Work Plan (Work Plan). Following the meeting, SWM staff finalized the Work Plan, which included the goals and anticipated budget for the up-coming year. The goals and budget were based upon both the requirements outlined in the IAVMP and the specific requirements prescribed by the pending DOE Grant Agreement. 20 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT Because an accurate and systematic plant survey was not performed in recent years, approximate acreages for the four primary aquatic weeds in the lake were used. Estimated costs for control and/or treatment activities were derived for the Work Plan. Other Work Plan budget items, such as public education efforts, were more easily identifiable based upon similar work completed recently for the Steel Lake Management District. On May 2, SWM staff sent a letter with the Annual Work Plan to all lake residents requesting feedback concerning the planned aquatic plant management program. No comments were received. The following is a brief outline of the 2005 Work Plan: Task 1: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted invasive aquatic weeds (milfoil, fragrant water lily,purple loosestrife, and yellow flag iris), and other problematic aquatic plant issues (i.e. mud island removal) for the year. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the task. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 5.0. Task 2: Public Education describes all public education elements to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of invasive aquatic weeds. Items included in Task 2 include: annual community meeting(spring) and annual Plant ID Workshop (summer); quarterly newsletter(The Lake View); boater outreach program;printing and distribution of educational flyers; improved signage at boat launch; web site development; and development of an annual report. 7.1.4 Plant ID Workshop A joint North Lake—Steel Lake Plant ID Workshop was held on July 23 at Steel Lake Park. This event provided an atmosphere of learning within a social setting. Residents from both lakes were presented information describing each aquatic plant management program. They were also able to pose questions to both Surface Water Management (SWM) staff and individual NLSC members. Over 25 households, totaling more than 35 people, attended the event. North Lake residents were afforded the opportunity to review the Work Plan and examine maps depicting noxious weed infestation areas and proposed treatment locations. In addition, various public education displays provided hands-on opportunities for individuals to view both native and noxious plants (good and bad) retrieved from their lake. Both SWM staff and lake residents harvested the live plant specimens found in North Lake for the displays. 7.1.5 Boater Education On April 30, a local Boy Scout troop volunteered to hand out the milfoil education brochures at the public boat launch on the opening day of fishing season. A total of 22 volunteers contributed over 65 hours to distribute the brochures. Due to poor weather, boater turn-out was low. As a result, the group passed out approximately 40 brochures. 21 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT 7.2 Public Education The North Lake Public Education program for 2005 involved the following: 7.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter SWM staff began issuing the quarterly public education newsletter, The Lake View to all North Lake residents via US Postal Service; and to lake residents and interested parties via an email subscribe list. The newsletter, created jointly with the Steel Lake Management District, includes updates to lake residents concerning recent vegetation management activities, as well as education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 7.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via email prior to contractor activities including surveys and treatments. Also, lake residents were informed concerning all public meetings. A total of six formal public notices were mailed out to all lake property owners during 2005. In addition to these mailings, the information was posted on the North Lake web page and e-mailed to lake residents and interested parties. In July of 2005, SWM staff established an "Aquatic Weed Management" E-Subscribe account where lake residents could receive electronic updates regarding current lake activities, as well as other aquatic weed management information. In addition, periodic supplemental updates advising lake residents of work plan activities were e- mailed to E-Subscribe participants approximately 24 hours prior to the activity on the lake. 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs SWM staff developed and distributed the following lake-related informational flyers: • Milfoil • The Lake Friendly Landscape • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Blue Green Algae • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese Noxious weed identification signs were also installed at the public boat launch. The improved signage includes: (1) "Remember to Check Your Boat for Milfoil", and (2) a new DOE/WDFW sign that alerts the public that North Lake waters contain the non-native plant milfoil and the non- native animal red swamp crayfish. The signs visually identify the species of concern, and illustrate how boat owners should clean their boats before entering and when leaving the lake. 22 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT Z2.4 Web Page Development In 2005, SWM staff developed a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • Current IAVMP(with figures and maps) • 2005 Work Plan • Chronology and description of important 2005 North Lake activities • North Lake publications such as: The Lake View; informative flyers (milfoil, blue-green algae,purple loosestrife, ducks &geese, yellow flag iris, good plants bad plants); public notices; and NLSC Meeting notes. 7.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops a final year-end report to all lake residents and parties of interest that describes the activities of the prior year; and provides a budget overview. 8.0 2005 BUDGET REVEIW The 2005 Work Plan budget was derived from the scope of aquatic weed management expected to be accomplished during the year. Table 3 below provides an overview of the final North Lake aquatic plant management budget costs for 2005: Table 3. 2005 North Lake Budget Overview TASK Estimates Actual Expenses Task 1 &2, Project AdministrationNegetation Management $17,800.00 $21,859.25 Task 3, Public Education $1,674.00 $5,423.88 King County Grant (-)$ 1,000.00 O $618.75 YEAR END $ 18,474.00 $26,664.38 The following sections outline the estimated expenses compared to the actual end-of-year expenses for each task: 23 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT 8.1 Tasks 1 & 2 Budget, Project Administration/ Vegetation Management Table 4 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 1 and 2. Table 4. 2005 North Lake Budget, TASK 1 & 2, Project Administration/Vegetation M mt. GOAL 2005 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses Two diver surveys(Spring&Summer) $4,225.00 $4,596.80 Milfoil herbicide treatment $1,500.00 $2,992.00 Fragrant water lily herbicide treatment $1,500.00 $448.30 Yellow flag iris;purple loosestrife treatment $4,100.00 $2,244.00 Bottom barrier installation $250.00 0 Water lily island removal 0 0 Water quality monitoring $1,600.00 $1,400.00 NPDES notifications $625.00 $680.00 Post control survey $850.00 $924.80 Contractor letter report $700.00 $380.80 Contractor final report $500.00 $544.00 Yellow flag iris public education $100.00 0 Electric boat motor $210.00 $199.08 Weed rakes $160.00 $182.04 Refreshments and supplies for NLSC $160.00 $15.69 quarterly meetings SWM staff wages and benefits` 0 $6,269.24 Lake volunteer time` 0 $982.50 TOTALS $17,800.00 $21,859.25 The expenses related to SWM staff wages and benefits and volunteer time was not accounted for in the initial development of the 2005 Work Plan 8.2 Task 3 Budget, Public Education Table 5 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 3. Table 5. 2005 North Lake Budget, TASK 3 Public Education GOAL 2005 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses Quarterly newsletter $400.00 $163.52 Annual evaluation report* $200.00 0 Community Meeting $50.00 $15.69 Plant ID works ho /cookout $200.00 0 Public education printing $300.00 $102.13 Boater outreach program $100.00 0 New signs at boat launch $200.00 $114.46 Materials for Plant ID workshop $100.00 $58.00 City LIVID web page 0 0 SWM staff wages and benefits" 0 $4,617.58 Lake volunteer time" 0 $352.50 Taxes $124.00 N/A TOTALS $1,674.00 $5,423.88 * The cost to print,bind and deliver full-color copies of this report to all North Lake property owners will be charged to the 2006 budget. ** The expenses related to SWM staff wages and benefits and volunteer time was not accounted for in the initial development of the 2005 Work Plan 24 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT 9.0 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2006 The following provides an evaluation of the 2005 aquatic vegetation management program for North Lake, and recommendations offered for 2006: 9.1 2005 Evaluation 9.1.1 Aquatic Vegetation Management • Because contact aquatic herbicides cause a burning back of treated plants, they have a potential to adversely affect dissolved oxygen concentrations within a water body. As a result of a massive aquatic plant die-off in a specific area, there may be a rapid expansion of bacterial populations feeding on the dying plants. SWM staff inspected areas of the lake undergoing contractor herbicide treatments during and after application activities. No observations were made of stress conditions or death exhibited by fish or fauna within or adjacent to treatment areas. In addition, no individual reported any toxic and/or allergic response as a result of the treatments. • Post Control Visual Surveys indicated that herbicide treatment was effective this year for milfoil, fragrant water lily, yellow flag iris and purple loosestrife. All colonies of targeted plants showed expected stress. • Due to contractor scheduling of treatments and follow-ups, the evaluation process for water lily island removal was delayed. In addition, there were additional delays with the receipt of approvals from WDFW for this action. In the meantime, SWM staff was able to monitor the mud island removal techniques employed by the contractor on Steel Lake and decided that these methods would not be successful on the large island masses adhering to the south shore of North Lake(see Section 5.6). • Large colonies of native milfoil were missed during the survey effort(see Section 5.5). 9.1.2 Contract Management • On a number of instances throughout the 2005 plant management season, the contractor, AquaTechnex, provided poor communication to SWM staff. Communication issues resulted in SWM staff not being able to furnish lake residents timely information as designed by the scope of the work in the contract. 9.1.3 Public Education • The public education program(various efforts accomplished through email notifications, web site information, aquatic weed workshop event and direct mailing of educational materials) was effective in 2005. Through this program, North Lake property owners were provided many different avenues to access important information about their lake investment and performance of the aquatic weed management program under the DOE Grant Agreement. • The summer aquatic weed workshop — attended by both North Lake and Steel Lake communities — was a great opportunity for education. The Steel Lake LMD Advisory Committee made an observation that it could have been better attended by all lake 25 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT residents. Complacency by Steel Lake LMD members (a general attitude that the program is successful and does not need their input or cooperation) was one reason suggested. Also, it was noted that many residents may have been out of town during that particular weekend. 9.1.4 Algae • Due to aquatic plants dying in the lake following herbicide treatment, phosphorous may be released into the water column. The rapid release of phosphorous can trigger algae blooms, which can adversely impact human and environmental health. Although some Committee members commented on the growth of filamentous algae (pond scum), SWM did not receive any reports of toxic algae blooms on North Lake in 2005. 9.1.5 Other • Bottom barrier installation at the boat launch did not occur in 2005 due to the focus on the completion of herbicide treatment surveys and treatment scheduling. 9.2 Recommendations for 2006 9.2.1 Aquatic Vegetation Management • Continue an aggressive strategy per the DOE Grant Agreement targeting all discovered colonies of milfoil, fragrant water lily, yellow flag iris, and purple loosestrife. Pursue Right of Entry from lakefront residents for emergent vegetation treatment on private property. • The densities of native aquatic weeds should be determined as early as possible by the contractor in the initial survey in order to educate SWM staff and North Lake residents on how the plants are impacting beneficial uses. This information would be used to teach residents how the plants can be manually controlled using hand pulling techniques or weed rakes. • North Lake Steering Committee members agreed to consider volunteer mud island control and removal efforts due to the lack of success seen on Steel Lake in 2005, and the expected high costs proposed by the contractor for mechanical removal. SWM staff will assist with communication and scheduling. Proper WDFW HPA permitting will be followed to ensure that aquatic habitat is not degraded due to mud island removal methods. • SWM staff will coordinate with King County staff in spring of 2006 to attempt to locate possible fanwort colonies. 9.2.2 Contract Management • Due to the communication and performance concerns with the contractor in 2005, the North Lake Steering Committee will meet with AquaTechnex prior to the commencement of the 2006 program. The Committee will stress the importance of the required advance notices, firm scheduling, timely reporting and accurate invoicing. 26 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT 9.2.3 Public Education • Continue the successful public education program in 2006. Efforts may be implemented to boost aquatic plant ID Workshop attendance if possible and to expand the lake resident email data base. The Committee suggested that the Spring Meeting be held at the North Lake Club House to improve attendance. • The City's 2006 Natural Yard Care Program will be targeting the North Lake watershed and surrounding communities. 9.2.4 Algae • Due to the new housing development in the North Lake watershed, and the potential for increased nutrient loading, the emergence of algae blooms will be closely monitored and followed up with timely public education when warranted. 9.2.5 Other • The North Lake Improvement Club (through the North Lake Management Fund) continues to be committed to an annual in-kind cash contribution of $500.00 per the 2004 IAVMP and the DOE Grant Agreement budget. • Also, the lake group is also committed to contributing a minimum of 135 volunteer hours per year toward aquatic weed management efforts; and will track appropriate hours on time sheets provided by SWM staff. 27 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2005 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE Aquatic Weed Management Program 2006 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Author: Dan Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................................1 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................................................1 2.2 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM....................................................................................................................2 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT......................................................................................3 4.0 2006 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES..........................................................................3 4.1 CONTRACT FOR AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT................................................................................3 4.2 INITIAL SYSTEMATIC SURVEY.......................................................................................................................4 4.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily.................................................................................................................................4 4.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris.......................................................................................................................................5 4.2.3 Purple Loosestrife....................................................................................................................................5 4.3 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS..............................................................................................................................5 4.3.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment...............................................................................................................6 4.3.2 Yellow Flag Iris&Purple Loosestrife Treatment...................................................................................7 4.4 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL...................................................................................................................8 4.5 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL....................................................................................................................8 4.6 BOTTOM BARRIER INSTALLATION.................................................................................................................9 4.7 WEED RAKES................................................................................................................................................9 4.8 SECOND SYSTEMATIC SURVEY.....................................................................................................................9 4.9 DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY SURVEY...........................................................................................................11 4.10 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT.........................................................................................................12 4.11 ALGAE........................................................................................................................................................13 5.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................................................................13 5.1 2006 WATER QUALITY MONITORING..........................................................................................................13 6.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT...............................................................................................15 6.1 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT.......................................................................................................................15 6.1.1 North Lake Steering Committee(NLSC)...............................................................................................15 6.1.2 Development of 2005 Work Plan..........................................................................................................17 6.1.3 Annual Spring Meeting.........................................................................................................................17 6.1.4 Plant ID Workshop...............................................................................................................................17 6.1.5 Boater Education..................................................................................................................................18 6.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION....................................................................................................................................18 6.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter.............................................................................................................................18 6.2.2 Public Notices.......................................................................................................................................18 6.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs...............................................................................................................18 6.2.4 Web Page Development........................................................................................................................19 6.2.5 Annual Report........................................................................................................................................19 7.0 2006 BUDGET REVIEW............................................................................................................................19 7.1 TASKS 1&2 BUDGET,PROJECT ADMINISTRATION/VEGETATION MANAGEMENT......................................20 7.2 TASK 3 PUBLIC EDUCATION........................................................................................................................20 7.3 ECOLOGY GRANT BUDGET REVIEw............................................................................................................21 8.0 2006 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2007..........................................21 8.1 2006 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SUMMARY.............................................................................21 8.2 2007 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................22 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 8.3 2006 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY..........................................................................................................23 8.4 2007 PUBLIC EDUCATION RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................23 8.5 2006 ECOLOGY GRANT BUDGET SUMMARY...............................................................................................23 8.6 2006 ALGAE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................................23 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2006 North Lake Glyphosate Water Sampling...................14 Table 2. 2006 North Lake Budget Overview..................................19 Table 3. 2006 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2..............................20 Table 4. 2006 North Lake Budget, Task 3......................................20 Table 5 North Lake Grant Running Balance..................................21 THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON SWM WEB PAGE (http://www.cityoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?page=1219) North Lake Grant Agreement 2006 DOE Aquatic Plant & Algae NPDES Permit AquaTechnex North Lake 2006 Year End Report 2006 North Lake YFI & PL Right of Entry Parcel Map NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by all North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) members and the lake community who contributed to the successful 2006 aquatic plant management program. The Committee includes the following members: • Lake residents: Wendy Honey (Chairperson), Chuck Gibson (Co-Chair), Julie Cleary, Debra Hansen, Barry James, and James Chastain. • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Jennifer Hale. • City of Federal Way: Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Don Robinett(ESA&NPDES Coordinator). In addition, Surface Water Management (SWM) staff wishes to thank the City Council and City Manager for their collective support of our aquatic weed management efforts. We also recognize Kathy Hamel, Department of Ecology (Ecology), for her continuing aquatic plant management advice and encouragement. NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2006, the aquatic vegetation management actions and public education goals outlined in the North Lake 2006 Work Plan were successfully implemented. Noxious aquatic plants —fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife, and yellow flag iris — were targeted for control at as low a density as was environmentally and economically feasible, and at levels that did not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. In addition, an effective public education program was conducted that helped to prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants and non-native animal species to the lake. This program also aided in the early detection of aquatic weed re-infestations by continuing to involve the North Lake community in the aquatic plant management process. This annual report summarizes the steps taken by North Lake during 2006 to conform to the aquatic weed management program established in the 2004 Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP) —a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed eradication efforts in North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development An Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP) is a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed control efforts. In 2004, the North Lake community coordinated with the King County Lake Stewardship group to develop an IAVMP. In addition to laying the groundwork for future aquatic weed work, an up- to-date IAVMP was required by the Department of Ecology (Ecology) to be submitted prior to seeking future grant funding from the State. With assistance from King County, the lake community began developing an IAVMP. During this period, efforts began to prepare an Ecology Aquatic Weeds Management Fund (AWMF) grant application. A series of meetings were held throughout the summer of 2004 to gather public comment and to finalize the IAVMP. Anticipating future annexation by the City of Federal Way, Surface Water Management staff began participating in the process. The IAVMP was submitted on September 16, 2004, and Ecology issued final approval for the plan on October 8. With an approved IAVMP, application was made to Ecology for an AWMF grant. Early in 2005, the North Lake community officially became incorporated into the City of Federal Way. As a result, an AWMF grant was awarded to the city that included a multi-year effort to fully eradicate the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The action plan included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, 1 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT control, and public education. The grant budget totaled approximately $80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The Grant Agreement is scheduled to expire no later than December 31, 2009. The Scope of Work is broken out into the following four tasks: Task 1 —Project Administration/Management Task 2—Vegetation Management Task 3—Public Education Task 4—Reporting Task 1 (Project Administration/Management) involves the maintenance of project records; submittal of payment vouchers, fiscal forms and project reports; compliance with procurement and contracting requirements; attainment of all permits, licenses, easements of property rights; and submittal of all required performance items. Task 2 (Vegetation Management) and Task 3 (Public Education) are action items specifically required by this agreement, and are outlined and described in the 2006 North Lake Work Plan. Task 4 (Reporting) involves the preparation of a final report summarizing the actions taken during the entire period of the Grant Agreement. 2.2 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, tend to be invasive, and pose a serious threat to our State's water bodies — such as North Lake — if left unchecked. Because non-native plants have few natural controls in their new habitat, they spread rapidly, out-compete native plant and animal habitats, and degrade recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties (Ecology, 2006). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur, and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major classes (A, B and C) are listed according to the seriousness of the threat they pose to the state, or a region of the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level, with containment as the primary goal. 2 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a County option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. The joint efforts undertaken by the North Lake Steering Committee, lake residents, and SWM staff are described in this year-end report. The document also outlines the work completed to eradicate the following three noxious weed species detected in 2006: Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Fragrant water lily Nymphaea odorata C Yellow flag iris Iris pseudacorus C Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria B 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT On March 31, 2006, an application for coverage under the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit(permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae in North Lake was submitted. The permit combined and replaced portions of the Aquatic Noxious Weed Control General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and the Aquatic Nuisance Weed and Algae Control General NPDES Permit that was issued prior to 2006. The permit (#WAG-994094) was issued to the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex on June 2, 2006. It governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The five-year permit expires on April 1, 2011. Ecology's new permit is issued under the authority of RCW 90.48. Such issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Ecology decided to issue a permit that is based solely on state authority to regulate the discharge of waste materials into waters of the state. 4.0 2006 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 4.1 Contract for Aquatic Vegetation Management In 2006, AquaTechnex, Inc. operated under the last year of a two-year Professional Services Agreement(contract) with the City of Federal Way that is managed by SWM staff. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides),post control surveys,reports as required, and attending meetings as required. 3 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 4.2 Initial Systematic Survey On June 2, 2006, AquaTechnex performed an initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake. The survey team mapped all submerged, floating and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. In addition to making a visual inspection, the survey team collected a number of rake samples at various GPS points. These points were collected to define each treatment area through diver communication to the mapping vessel team. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2006 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page). Native plant information may be found in Section 4.8. Although colonies of Eurasian watermilfoil (milfoil) were distributed throughout the littoral area in the northern and central part of North Lake in 2005, no milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) was detected during the 2006 initial systematic survey. Herbicide treatment with 2,4-D in 2005 appeared to be successful in completely eradicating this State of Washington Class B Weed from North Lake. It is important to note that Fanwort (Cabomba caroliniana), a state of Washington Class B Weed, also was not found in 2006, contrary to the 2005 initial systematic survey results. Additionally, a survey performed by Ecology in 2006 also confirmed that Fanwort was not present(see Section 4.9). Based on these findings, it is probable that the plant was misidentified. Noxious weeds found during the North Lake initial systematic survey include: • Fragrant water lily(Nymphaea odroata) • Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) • Purple loosestrife(Lythrum salicaria) The following is a discussion regarding the noxious weeds found during the initial survey. 4.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant waterlily(FWL) is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins, and can be recognized by the fragrant white,pink to purple,many-petaled flowers that float on the water surface. Their large, round, floating leaves have a distinctive slit on one side. Due to its attractiveness, this nonnative plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has been introduced to many lakes in Washington, but can be invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas (Ecology 2006). The June 2 survey located FWL growth in North Lake, and as with prior years, the colonies were noted to be emerging in areas along the shoreline perimeter. In 2006, the densities of FWL were reported to be less than in 2005. Based on the survey results, AquaTechnex recommended 4 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT targeting this species with the aquatic herbicide glyphosate (Rodeo) as necessary for complete eradication. 4.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable with its showy yellow flowers colorfully displayed along the edge of water and in wetlands. The flowers occur in late spring or early summer. The noxious aquatic plant(State of Washington Class C Weed), including flower stalk, will grow up to nearly five feet tall. The rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude native wetland species (WA State Noxious Weed Control Board). The initial survey found YFI populating the shoreline perimeter, but scattered in selected locations. Because the proposed control action would involve herbicide application to YFI on private property, permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required (see Section 4.3.2). Identical to the control plan implemented in 2005, glyphosate (Rodeo) would be utilized for YFI treatments. Glyphosate provides effective long-term control, with applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide into the root system. AquaTechnex indicated that populations of the noxious weed decreased in density from that identified in 2005. 4.2.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This erect, robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class C Weed(Ecology, 2006). PL was observed at North Lake during the initial June survey and was reported to be in lesser densities than what was recorded in 2005. Identical to YFI treatment, the proposed control action for PL would involve herbicide application on private property. Therefore, permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required(see Section 4.3.2). The noxious emergent plant was reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake, although the survey occurred early in the growing season for this perennial weed. Because an aquatic plant survey only provides a snapshot of the conditions present in the lake at the time of the inspection, it was expected that additional PL seedlings would emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines later in the growing season. 4.3 Herbicide Treatments The herbicide treatment program was designed to meet the requirements of both the Ecology Grant Agreement and NPDES permit. Within this framework, Year Two Integrated Treatment Plan benchmarks were followed where practical. 5 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities into water bodies that are contiguous with rivers, creeks, and lakes; or into navigable waters. The applicator also must comply all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (Rodeo) was used to treat FWL, YFI and PL on North Lake in 2006. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for aquatic applications. The active ingredient in glyphosate moves through the plant from the point of foliage contact into the root system. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days, seven days on more on most perennial weeds, and thirty days or more on most woody plants. It is known that extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects include gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which will advance to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a fast-acting systemic herbicide effective in removing targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. 4.3.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication pursuant to the requirements outlined in the Ecology Grant Agreement. Eradication will improve boater access and provide safer recreation opportunities. Because the treatment areas were smaller than in 2005, the potential for extensive floating mud island formation was expected to be less likely. In addition, defined treatment of water lily colonies would achieve the following: • The gradual replacement of native vegetation over time to preserve and improve fish habitat. • A reduced possibility that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would contribute to increased nutrient loading(resulting in algae blooms). • A reduction in the likelihood that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would place a demand on dissolved oxygen, thereby stressing aquatic life. The AquaTechnex 2006 North Lake Year End Report (found on the SWM website) contains maps with locations of FWL colonies. Glyphosate (Rodeo), a liquid, was applied directly on the lily pads by a two-person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied 6 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT (by licensed applicators) uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication to areas that did not uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated equaled less than one acre. The first glyphosate application of FWL was conducted on the morning of August 11. Due to high winds, the application was suspended. A second application was attempted on August 29, but windy conditions prevented further treatment activity. To effectively eradicate FWL populations, it is characteristic to perform additional treatments during the growing season. A third spot treatment was scheduled for the last week of August, but SWM staff voiced concern about predicted wet weather and possible community disruptions due to the upcoming Labor Day weekend. AquaTechnex agreed to postpone treatment. Because of the treatment postponement, AquaTechnex was required to obtain approval from Ecology to apply herbicide beyond the last day(September 1) that was indicated on the residential notices. The Department of Ecology granted approval for treatment date extension, and the third application took place on September 5, 2006. The contractor reported that wind again became a limiting factor in herbicide effectiveness. 4.3.2 Yellow Flag Iris & Purple Loosestrife Treatment Following the requirements outlined in the Grant Agreement, eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2006. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of the emergent weeds. Maps showing YSI and PL colony locations and all lake parcels granting access for treatment may be found on the SWM website. YFI and PL colonies were treated on August 11 with glyphosate, but the application was suspended due to high winds. The crew returned on August 29, focusing on the residential side of the lake, but poor weather conditions again stopped applications. A follow-up spot treatment was scheduled for the last week of August. As with the fragrant water lily follow-up treatment described above, herbicide application was postponed due to advancing wet weather and the holiday weekend. With Ecology approval, the last application took place on September 5, 2006 during windy conditions when AquaTechnex accessed the south end of the lake via airboat. The YFI and PL-treated areas in 2006 totaled less than one acre. During treatment, AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate (Rodeo). The noxious weeds were either sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat, or from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex was careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses. For PL, spraying individual plant was deemed the most effective application method (versus wicking) given the issues of work efficiency and accessibility. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators) in the same fashion as that for FWL. 7 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 4.4 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM staff issued notices to all lake residents regarding proper hand pulling and digging techniques for YFL For PL, hand removal methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks) were offered as effective options, including proper disposal of all organic debris (roots, seed heads and stems). Three residents contributed 21 volunteer hours removing PL seed heads and stalks on private parcels around the lake. On September 19, Washington Department of Wildlife personnel (contracted by King County Noxious Weed Control Program) performed manual removal and treatment of PL at the public boat launch property. All seed heads were removed and properly disposed of, and the remaining stalks were treated with glyphosate. This work was not included in the scope of work covered by the Ecology AWMF Grant Agreement. On October 6, Mark Braverman with McKinstry (Weyerhaeuser contractor) reported that all PL was removed from the Weyerhaeuser property as part of their annual weed control efforts. PL was hand-removed on upland areas adjacent to the lake that are not included as part of the city's Grant Agreement scope of work. AquaTechnex also undertook controls to manually remove PL seed heads. On October 12, the contractor removed a large amount of surviving PL plants (some flowering and some with intact seed heads). A total of three 40-gallon bags of plant waste were removed, primarily from the south side of the lake (on the floating masses and on the Weyerhaeuser property side). Because it appeared that many of these plants had not been properly treated with herbicide, AquaTechnex did not charge the city for the manual removal effort. 4.5 Water Lily Island Control North Lake continued to experience the emergence of floating masses of dead FWL roots and muck, primarily along the south shore. Early in the year, the NLSC agreed that floating FWL island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if the masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. The NLSC assessed all of the control options and costs provided by AquaTechnex and agreed to proceed only with volunteer mud island removal efforts this year. As a result, Chuck Gibson and Terry Thomas, lake residents, began limited manual hand-work on the floating masses at the south end of North Lake during the spring. Similar to the year before, they continued to chop at the islands (ranging in thickness from one to four feet) with lawn edgers. This action released trapped gases and allowed some of the sediment to sink. They were also able to push small pieces (ten to twelve feet across) to deeper water, where they broke up and sank after prodding with an oar. Their work was successful in creating additional narrow channels from the lake to the shoreline On August 26, a larger mud island removal volunteer effort took place at the south end of the lake. A total of nine lake residents, piloting six different boats, were able to destroy large 8 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT portions of the floating masses using manual methods. The work helped to deepen and expand the open water into several lake residents' dock areas. A total of thirty-three volunteer hours were completed for this effort. 4.6 Bottom Barrier Installation The Ecology Grant Agreement included the requirement for bottom barrier installation at the public boat launch area. A bottom barrier covers the sediment like a blanket, compressing aquatic plants while reducing or blocking light. Bottom screening can be an important tool to help eradicate and contain early infestations of noxious weeds such as milfoil. Because the boat launch area is not infested with milfoil, and given the possibility that the mat may interfere with boat navigation and fishing activities, SWM staff requested that Ecology waive this requirement. On May 18, Kathy Hamel, Aquatic Weed Specialist with Ecology, granted the waiver. 4.7 Weed Rakes The weed rake loan program continued in 2006,providing North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain the beneficial uses of the shoreline for fishing, boating and swimming. Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline(not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the WDFW Aquatic Plants and Fish Pamphlet. Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes depending on the type of plant targeted: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. Because milfoil was not detected during the June 2 initial survey, weed rakes were loaned out immediately to lake residents impacted only by native weed infestations. Rakes were checked out to approximately eleven households until September 15 when the program was shut down for the season pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 4.8 Second Systematic Survey The second survey was performed on October 3. The objective was to quantify the vegetation present and to provide a continued baseline of the condition of the lake plant communities. Methods used were identical to the initial survey. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2006 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page). Due to the warm and sunny summer, the growth of all aquatic vegetation in North Lake was reported to be vigorous. In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 4.0, the native species documented during the second systematic survey included: 9 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT EMERGENT PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Cattail Typha spp. Native Spike Rush Eleocharis sp. Native Bull Rush Scirpus spp. Native FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Yellow pond lily Nuphar spp. Native Spatterdock Nuphar polysepalum Native Watershield Brasenia schreberi Native SUBMERSED PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Muskgrass Chara sp. Native Naiad Najas sp. Native Large leaf pondweed Potamogeton Amplifoious Native Clasping-leaf pondweed Potamogeton richardsonii Native American elodea Elodea Canadensis Native Bladderwort Utricularia sp. Native Northern watermilfoil Myriophyllum sibericum Native Emergent Plants Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species, Typha spp. (Cattail), Eleocharis sp. (Spike Rush), and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush), that grow in the shallow margins of a lake. The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals, and Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese. All North Lake's emergent vegetation provides habitat for amphibians and fish and help to stabilize shorelines. Floating Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and provides spawning habitat for fish. Nuphar polysepalum (Spatterdock) is a perennial waterlily-like plant that forms extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. When mature, spatterdock has large elephant-ear- shaped leaves and yellow flowers. Brasenia schreberi (Water-shield) was reported to be increasing in density. The native plant, similar to water lily, are identified by their long reddish leaf stalks attached to the centers of the floating oval leaves, giving them an umbrella-like appearance. Water-shield flowers are small, purplish, and rise slightly above the water. 10 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that was reported to have increased in density from 2005. Unlike most other perennial aquatic plants, it reproduces from seed each year. The aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring, producing seeds, and then dropping them to the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. Although they have the potential to cause problems for swimmers and boaters in shallow waters, the absence of complaints indicate that beneficial uses of the lake have not yet been adversely impacted by this species. Other submerged plant species in the lake included Potamogeton amplifolious (Large leaf pondweed) and Potamogeton richardsonii (Clasping leaf pondweed). These native members of the pondweed family occur in small clumps where mapped, and were observed in similar density throughout the remaining littoral lake zones. Of these two plant species, P. richardsonii was reported to be increasing in density from the previous year, but not to the point of becoming problematic. The native aquatic plant Elodea was also reported to be increasing in density. It is found as an under story or secondary plant in the lake, and can expand to the point of causing major problems. The absence of complaints from lake residents concerning this species indicate that beneficial uses were not impacted. Chara (Muskgrass) is a macro algae and is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. Utricularia sp or Bladderwort was also present. Bladderworts are unique in the aquatic environment in that they are carnivorous, with a number of small bladders along the stems and leaves. The is plant similar to milfoil, but the bladders distinguish it from that species. The AquaTechnex 2006 North Lake Year End Report states that approximately 65% of the lake littoral zone is covered by both floating and submerged aquatic plants. Based upon these figures, North Lake is well within the WDFW and Ecology criteria for a minimum of 35% native vegetation littoral zone coverage to support good fish habitat. 4.9 Department of Ecology Survey On July 6, Ecology personnel performed an aquatic survey of North Lake by collecting rake samples from a boat and observing the entire shoreline and littoral zone for plant species identification. The field work was completed per their Environmental Assessment Program as a means to follow up on lakes that received Ecology grant funding for aquatic plant management activities. In addition, Ecology field staff were concerned about the possible presence of Fanwort (Cabomba Carolinian), a state of Washington Class B Weed, that was documented by AquaTechnex in 2005 as populating North Lake. Ecology did not find this plant species during their survey effort. 11 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT Aquatic plants identified in 2006 by Ecology,but not by AquaTechnex,included: EMERGENT PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Spreading rush Juncus sp. Native Naked-stemmed bulrush Schoenoplectus sp. Native Purple marshlocks Comarum palustre Native Narrow leaf cattail Typha angustifolia Non-native FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Water-purslane Ludwigia palustris Native It is important to note that Jennifer Parsons, Ecology Aquatic Plant Specialist, made a second visit to North Lake at the end of September. The additional survey work was required in order to make a positive identification of Narrow leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) during the late summer period when the plant's mature flower spikes finally emerged. Parsons positively confirmed the presence of the non-native weed, which was isolated on a single property near the north end of the lake. Narrow leaf cattail is currently on the noxious weed monitor list. According to Parsons, it has caused considerable problems in the Midwest, and can hybridize with native cattail to form an even more invasive strain. Due to these factors, Ecology has approved the addition of this noxious plant to the North Lake Grant Agreement scope of work. Narrow leaf cattail will be targeted for herbicide treatment in 2007,provided that affected property owners grant permission for entry. 4.10 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on September 29, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the glyphosate herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2006 on the three targeted species (FWL, PL and YFI). AquaTechnex reported that weather prevented maximum control of FWL, reducing their densities but not fully eradicating the noxious weed. In addition, visual observations provided by lake residents (Debra Hansen and Chuck Gibson) concerning FWL survivability at both ends of the lake indicated that the treatments were not fully effective (lack of browning vegetation). The contractor recommends follow up control, and projects that 99% or greater of the original FWL population will be eradicated by the end of 2007. The AquaTechnex Final report also states that the 2006 PL and YFI control efforts provided good results in all areas treated. However, many surviving and emerging PL and YFI plants were observed by lake residents along shoreline areas presumed to be treated. During an October 12 return visit, AquaTechnex staff commented that an unusual number of PL plants were thriving along the west side of the lake and throughout the floating mats at the south end. As a result, a manual control effort was implemented to remove PL before additional seed heads dropped from the surviving plants (See Section 4.4). 12 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 4.11 Algae Many common fresh water blue-green algae species are known to produce toxins at varying concentrations depending on the lake conditions. Because of possible toxic algal blooms with the potential of producing toxins at levels dangerous to small children and animals, SWM staff issued an algae alert flyer to all North Lake residents during the summer. The caution warned of the possible presence of algal blooms during warmer months, and recommended safe actions designed to prevent exposure. AquaTechnex identified both filamentous green algae (Cladophora spp.) and filamentous blue- green algae (Anabaena spp.) to be present during the systematic aquatic plant surveys, although the distribution or density of the algae species were not recorded in the survey report. In 2006, no complaints were received by SWM staff concerning the presence of blue-green algal blooms or other problematic algae concentrations in North Lake. In 2005, the Washington State Legislature established funding for an algae control program and asked Ecology to develop the program. The program focuses on providing local governments with the tools they need to manage algae problems. A total of$250,000 will be earmarked each year to target blue-green algae due to the health risks posed to humans,pets, and livestock. Ecology will begin funding small grants to local governments in fall 2007. In the interim, the Washington Department of Health (DOH) will develop statewide guidelines for toxic algae blooms under a grant provided by Ecology. These guidelines will help local governments make decisions about when to post health advisories and when to close waters to recreation. In addition, DOH will provide and post educational signs and outreach materials concerning algal blooms for all troubled waterbodies. 5.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING 5.1 2006 Water Quality Monitoring Per the Ecology Grant Agreement, SWM Water Quality personnel collected samples from North Lake to determine glyphosate concentrations before and after treatment. North Lake was not treated with 2,4-D in 2006. The sampling procedure was undertaken to determine lake concentrations of herbicides, and to provide an analytical measurement of the contractor's performance. Background samples (before treatment) and post treatment samples were collected at time intervals prescribed in the Grant Agreement. Samples were taken in the middle of the lake (outside the treatment areas), and inside an individual FWL treatment site and analyzed for glyphosate. All samples were collected using a Wildco Alpha 2.2 liter Van Dorn style water bottle. The samples were retrieved from various depths, and combined into individual composite samples. 13 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT Each sample was immediately chilled, refrigerated, and shipped within holding time to Columbia Analytical Services, Inc. in Kelso, Washington (Ecology accredited laboratory #C1203) and analyzed by USEPA Chromatography Method 547. Table 1 below outlines the results of the sampling. Table 1. 2006 North Lake Glyphosate Water Sampling Date Pre/Post Inside/Outside Location Concentration(ppb) Treatment Zone Background in littoral zone, 6/30/06 Pre Inside approximately 700'south of Non Detect public boat launch,inside water lily populated area Background outside littoral zone,approximately 700' 6/30/06 Pre Outside south of public boat launch, Non Detect outside water lily populated area Outside littoral zone, 8/11/06 Post Outside approximately 700'south of Non Detect 1-hour public boat launch,outside water lily populated area Inside littoral zone, 8/11/06 Post Inside approximately 700'south of 26 1-hour public boat launch,inside water lily treated area Outside littoral zone, 8/11/06 Post Outside approximately 700'south of Non Detect 4.5-hours public boat launch,outside water lily populated area Inside littoral zone, 8/11/05 Post Inside approximately 700'south of Non Detect 4.5-hours public boat launch,inside water lily treated area No water use restrictions are indicated for glyphosate, however Ecology recommends a 24-hour swimming advisory for areas treated with this herbicide. In addition, the product's label restrictions and requirements in the NPDES permit do not allow application directly to water within 0.5 mile of a potable water intake. (Note, North Lake is not known to be a source of drinking water). The USEPA Safe Drinking Water Act determines safe levels of chemicals in drinking water which do or may cause health problems. These non-enforceable levels, based solely on possible 14 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT health risks and exposure, are called Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLG). The MCLG for glyphosate has been set at 700 parts per billion(ppb). The analytical findings above demonstrate that glyphosate concentrations in the water column (26 ppb) were well below the USEPA MCLG levels (700 ppb) immediately after treatment (one hour), and appear to have completely dissipated before the end of the 24-hour swimming advisory. In addition, there were no reports of damage to lawns or gardens from the application of irrigated water. 6.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The elements of the Education and Public Involvement Program for North Lake are based primarily on the Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). The Ecology Grant Agreement incorporates the information in the IAVMP, forming two primary components for Education and Public Involvement. The two components focus on prevention and detection of noxious aquatic and emergent weeds, and lake stewardship. The North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) oversees the implementation of the Ecology Grant Agreement, which is outlined in the 2006 North Lake Work Plan. 6.1 Community Involvement North Lake Community Involvement program for 2006 involved the following: 6.1.1 North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) The NLSC is charged with setting the aquatic plant management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. The NLSC is comprised of North Lake residents, Weyerhaeuser representatives and City of Federal Way staff. The Committee meets quarterly, or more often as necessary to implement Work Plan goals. The following members comprise the NLSC: Lake Residents Wendy Honey—(Chair) Debra Hansen Chuck Gibson—(Co-Chair) Barry James Julie Cleary James Chastain Weverhaueser Representitive Jennifer Hale City of Federal Way Dan Smith, Surface Water Management Don Robinett, Surface Water Management 15 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities of the NLSC: • Reviews annual plant survey information. • Develops an annual aquatic plant management Work Plan based upon the information revealed in the annual plant surveys. The Work Plan prioritizes aquatic weed problem areas, identifies preferred control methods for each species, and develops the anticipated budget. • Assists the City of Federal Way with oversight of control work to keep contractors accountable. • Participates in preparation of an annual evaluation report that summarizes plant control activities, lake-user's perspectives on the plant community, and recommendations for the next year's control strategy. • Assists with presentation of aquatic plant management efforts to lake residents at an annual community meeting and Plant ID Workshop. • Helps the City of Federal Way to ensure that all lake residents receive proper notification pursuant to the requirements of the Aquatic Plant&Algae NPDES Permit. • Participates in other annual community involvement/education strategies and plant control efforts as needed. The NLSC met four times in 2006. The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. The following are brief abstracts from each NLSC meeting: February 9,2006 • Reviewed new committee member roles and duties. • Reviewed Grant Agreement requirements. • Discussed 2005 Work Plan and budget, and offered recommendations for 2006. • Reviewed grant-related volunteer service and recordkeeping. • Began crafting 2006 Work Plan. March 21,2006 • Met jointly with Steel Lake Steering Committee and aquatic plant management contractor (AquaTechnex)representative. • Discussed new NPDES permit requirements and legal issues. • Reviewed contractor issues: communication problems and expectations for 2006. May 4,2006 • Annual Spring Meeting was conducted to formally review the 2005 program and to review the 2006 Work Plan with lake residents. October 12,2006 • End-of-season review of 2006 survey results and herbicide treatment effectiveness. • Reviewed public education program. • Reviewed status of Ecology Grant budget to-date. • Discussed contractor performance issues and plans for a new contract in 2007. 16 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 6.1.2 Development of 2005 Work Plan On February 9, the NLSC discussed both the structure and content of the 2006 North Lake Aquatic Plant Management Draft Work Plan (Work Plan). The goals and budget were based upon both the requirements outlined in the IAVMP and the specific requirements prescribed by the Ecology Grant Agreement. Following the meeting, SWM staff finalized the Work Plan, which included the goals and anticipated budget for the up-coming year. The following is a brief outline of the 2006 Work Plan: Task 1: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted invasive aquatic weeds (milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife, and yellow flag iris), and other problematic aquatic plant issues (i.e. mud island removal) for the year. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 4.0. Task 2: Public Education describes all public education elements to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of invasive aquatic weeds. Items included in Task 2 include: annual community meeting (spring) and annual Plant ID Workshop (summer); quarterly newsletter(The Lake View); boater outreach program; printing and distribution of educational flyers; web site development; and development of an annual report. 6.1.3 Annual Spring Meeting The North Lake Spring Community Meeting was held on May 4, 2006 at the North Lake Clubhouse. SWM staff reviewed the efforts undertaken in 2005, and outlined the proposed 2006 Work Plan and budget, implications of new NPDES Permit, weed treatment options, right-of- entry procedures, and recordkeeping/reporting of volunteer hours. Various questions from lake residents were addressed and citizen feedback was solicited. The meeting was attended by approximately eighteen lake residents. 6.1.4 Plant ID Workshop A joint Steel Lake—North Lake Plant ID Workshop was held on July 8 at Steel Lake Park. This event provided an atmosphere of learning within a social setting. Residents from both lakes were presented information describing each aquatic plant management program. They were also able to pose questions to both SWM staff and individual NLSC members. Over thirteen households, totaling more than nineteen residents, attended the event. At the Workshop, North Lake residents were afforded the opportunity to review the 2006 Work Plan and examine maps depicting noxious weed infestation areas and proposed treatment locations. In addition, various public education displays provided hands-on opportunities for individuals to view both native and noxious plants (good and bad)retrieved from their lake. Both SWM staff and lake residents harvested the live plant specimens found in North Lake for the displays. 17 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 6.1.5 Boater Education On April 28 (Opening Day of Fishing Season), a local Boy Scout Troop handed out approximately 20 Milfoil Education Brochures to boaters at the North Lake Boat Ramp. Although boater turnout was low due to inclement weather, the brochure outlined the detrimental effect milfoil has on fresh water lakes, the propagation of the noxious plant, and how to properly clean vessels prior to entering or leaving the boating area. 6.2 Public Education The North Lake Public Education program for 2006 involved the following: 6.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter SWM staff continued issuing the quarterly public education newsletter, The Lake View to all North Lake residents via US Postal Service; and to lake residents and interested parties via an email subscribe list. The newsletter, created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, includes updates to lake residents concerning recent vegetation management activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 6.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via mail and email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. Lake residents were also sent notices prior to all public meetings. During the course of 2006, SWM staff mailed out four formal public notices and emailed approximately six supplemental notices to lake residents. All public notices were posted on the North Lake web page. In addition,periodic supplemental updates advising lake residents of work plan activities were e-mailed to E-Subscribe participants approximately 24 hours prior to the activity on the lake. 6.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs SWM staff developed and distributed the following lake-related informational flyers: • Milfoil • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Blue Green Algae • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program 18 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 6.2.4 Web Page Development In 2006, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • Current IAVMP(with figures and maps) • 2006 Work Plan • Chronology and description of important 2006 North Lake activities • North Lake publications such as: The Lake View; informative flyers (milfoil, blue-green algae,purple loosestrife, ducks &geese, yellow flag iris, good plants bad plants); public notices; and NLSC Meeting notes. 6.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops a final year-end report to all lake residents and parties of interest that describes the activities and a budget review of the prior year. 7.0 2006 BUDGET REVIEW The 2006 Work Plan budget was calculated based upon the scope of aquatic weed management expected to be accomplished during the year. Table 2 below provides an overview of the final North Lake aquatic plant management budget costs for 2006: Table 2. 2006 North Lake Budget Overview TASK Estimates Actual Expenses Task 1 &2, Project AdministrationNegetation Management 22,044 13,967 Task 3, Public Education 5,450 5,834 YEAR END $ 27,494 $ 19,801 19 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 7.1 Tasks 1 & 2 Budget, Project Administration/ Vegetation Management Table 3 below illustrates the grant-eligible budgeted elements for Task 1 and 2. Table 3. 2006 North Lake Budget, TASK 1 & 2, Project Administration/Vegetation M mt. GOAL 2006 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) 2006 Permit Public Notice requirement 150.00 163.00 Two diver surveys(Spring&Summer) 4,597.00 4,597.00 Milfoil herbicide treatment 1,500.00 0 Fragrant water lily herbicide treatment 500.00 224.00 Yellow flag iris and purple loosestrife 980.00 224.00 treatment Advance resident notifications&shoreline 680.00 680.00 posting Water quality monitoring 1,400.00 990.00 Water sample shipping 0 43.00 Post control survey 925.00 0 Contractor letter report 381.00 0 Contractor final report 544.00 544.00 Bottom barrier installation 250.00 0 Water lily island control 3,000.00 0 Miscellaneous water quality issues(i.e. algae) 300.00 7.00 Refreshments and supplies for NLSC 60.00 12.00 quarterly meetin s Grant-eligible SWM staff wages and benefits 4,500.00 5,070.00 Grant-eligible lake volunteer time 2,250.00 1,413.00 TOTALS $21,717.00 $13,967.00 Note: The 2006 Weed Permit&Application fee($327.00)and the 2007 Weed Permit Fee($338.00)were not grant eligible expenses. 7.2 Task 3 Public Education Table 4 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 3. Table 4. 2006 North Lake Budget, TASK 3 Public Education GOAL 2006 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Quarterly newsletter 350.00 309.00 Annual evaluation report 100.00 96.00 Annual Spring Community Meeting 50.00 0 Plant ID works ho /cookout 300.00 88.00 Public education printing 150.00 51.00 Boater outreach program 100.00 102.00 City LIVID web page 0 0 Grant-eligible SWM staff wages and benefits 3,500.00 1 4,753.00 Grant-eligible lake volunteer time 900.00 1 435.00 TOTALS 5,450.00 5,834.00 20 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT 7.3 Ecology Grant Budget Review Table 5 below summarizes the running balance of the Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund grant for North Lake, set to expire December 31, 2009: Table 5. North Lake Grant Running Balance Year Grant Funds Used Running Balance Start N/A $60,158 2005 18,882 $41,276 2006 14,849 $26,427 8.0 2006 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2007 The following discussion summarizes the 2006 North Lake program, and outlines recommendations for 2007: 8.1 2006 Aquatic Vegetation Management Summary The NLSC agreed that the aquatic vegetation management actions included in the 2006 Work Plan were fully implemented and that program spending did not exceed the beginning of the year budget estimates. Targeted weeds — FWL, PL and YFI — continued to be controlled. The following outlines the major 2006 developments worth noting: • The on-going success of the zero-tolerance milfoil eradication program was evidenced by the absence of the noxious weed found during the survey. As a result, 2,4-D (or equivalent) was not applied, saving program funds and eliminating concerns regarding ecological impacts of the herbicide. • Both SWM staff and NLSC Committee members agreed that herbicide treatments for FWL, YFI and PL were not completely effective in 2006. Despite a meeting held early in the year to discuss communication and staffing issues, AquaTechnex still fell behind schedule. Due to the contractor's workload, treatments for FWL, YFI and PL took place late in the season. The delay was further complicated toward the end of summer when the amount of available calendar days became limited, and weather (wind and rain) became a factor. This resulted in reduced herbicide effectiveness. • Because of the time constraints experienced toward the end of the growing season, SWM granted AquaTechnex approval to proceed with herbicide treatments with less than the normal advance notification. Due to this, SWM staff was not able not provide the necessary contractor oversight on such short notice. Thereby, observations of key weed management activities did not occur as planned. 21 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT • The final visual evaluation of FWL and YFI treatment effectiveness by the contractor was questionable. There was some doubt as to whether the browning of targeted plants observed by SWM staff and lake residents was due to effects of herbicide application or by the normal end of season die back. • Admission by the contractor supported the observations made by residents concerning the survival of PL plants at the south end of the lake, indicating that the plants were not properly treated. Due to this, it is probable that PL seed heads were allowed to mature and drop before being manually removed in this area on October 12. • Approximately 90% of affected lake properties submitted Rights of Entry for permission to treat YFL Although maps were provided to the contractor, there was question whether the contractor utilized them to accurately treat required areas. A visual method to mark properties was recommended for implementation in 2007. • Comments were received that the aquatic weed eradicator rake(with sharp blade used for cutting), was not useful. Also, concerns were raised regarding the difficulty in obtaining the rakes for use on weekends and holidays. • The waiving of the requirement to install a bottom barrier at the boat launch resulted in cost savings. • AquaTechnex missed the identification of Narrow leaf cattail during their two separate survey efforts. Fortunately, the Department of Ecology discovered this plant. This will allow the noxious plant to be included in the 2007 Work Plan, • Because of the explosive growth of Naiad (Najas sp.) reported in Washington lakes in 2006, Ecology plans to return to North Lake to monitor the situation concerning native weed populations. 8.2 2007 Aquatic Vegetation Management Recommendations The majority of the problems encountered in 2006 revolved around contractor performance — primarily communication and staffing-related issues. Many of these issues will be addressed in new 2007 contract language requiring specific calendar dates for control actions and timetables for notification. The following outlines recommendations for 2007: • Following the evaluation of proposals, and the selection of an aquatic plant management firm for 2007, contract language should be developed that requires: (1) earlier growing season treatments to allow for adequate follow-up applications, (2) all herbicide treatment completion by date-certain timetables, (3) strict 48-hour prior notification from contractor for all lake-related work so that SWM staff can provide oversight, and (4) a means to visually mark shorelines by the contractor that properly identifies emergent plant colonies targeted for herbicide treatment. • Narrow leaf cattail will be added to the Work Plan scope of action. • Continue to stress open, frequent, and accurate communication with the selected contractor. 22 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT • Continue to solicit contractor oversight assistance and follow-up observations from lake residents so that issues concerning poor treatment effectiveness can be addressed in a timely manner. • Due to demand, the NLSC agreed to purchase one more 36-inch wide weed rake (with tines), and to have one of the lake residents handle the storage and loaning of the rakes to facilitate use on weekends and holidays. 8.3 2006 Public Education Summary The wide variety of Public Education products offered and distributed in 2006 appeared to be effective. The following outlines the major 2006 developments: • The annual Plant ID Workshop functioned as a great public education tool. SWM staff received positive feedback from attendees regarding the event and the material presented. 8.4 2007 Public Education Recommendations • Continue aggressive public education effort targeting all lake properties identified as being infested with noxious weeds in order to prevent their spread. • Implement more efficient volunteer timesheet recordkeeping and submittal procedure. • Because there were problems with lake residents submitting volunteer hours in a timely fashion, a better system needs to be implemented in order for Grant Payment Request to be submitted to Ecology on time on a bi-annual basis. 8.5 2006 Ecology Grant Budget Summary North Lake completed the second year of the Ecology AWMF Grant. At the end of 2006, $26,427 was left out of the initial $60,000 grant. Based on the expected annual expenditures for aquatic plant management, it is likely that all grant funds will be used after the 2008 season. Throughout 2006, the NLSC began preliminary discussions concerning possible Lake Management District (LMD) formation after grant expiration. The committee benefited by participating in joint-meetings with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, learning that utility formation takes months of public process. It is expected that the NLSC will continue considering LMD formation, and begin a formal plan of action by year end. 8.6 2006 Algae Summary SWM staff were well prepared in 2006 to alert lake residents to possible blue-green algae blooms. SWM staff will continued to follow development of the evolving Department of Ecology algae program throughout 2007 to keep informed concerning funding options, sampling protocols, and the development of new public health standards. 23 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE Aquatic Weed Management Program 2007 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Author: Dan Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................................1 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................................................1 2.2 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM....................................................................................................................2 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT......................................................................................3 4.0 2007 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES..........................................................................4 4.1 CONTRACT FOR AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT................................................................................4 4.2 INITIAL SYSTEMATIC SURVEY.......................................................................................................................4 4.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily.................................................................................................................................5 4.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris.......................................................................................................................................5 4.2.3 Purple Loosestrife....................................................................................................................................5 4.2.4 Narrow leaf cattail...................................................................................................................................6 4.3 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS..............................................................................................................................6 4.3.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment...............................................................................................................7 4.3.2 Yellow Flag Iris and Purple Loosestrife Treatment................................................................................7 4.3.3 Narrow Leaf Cattail Treatment...............................................................................................................8 4.4 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL...................................................................................................................8 4.5 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL....................................................................................................................9 4.6 WEED RAKES................................................................................................................................................9 4.7 SECOND SYSTEMATIC SURVEY.....................................................................................................................9 4.8 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT.........................................................................................................11 4.9 ALGAE........................................................................................................................................................12 5.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................................................................12 6.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT...............................................................................................13 6.1 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT.......................................................................................................................13 6.1.1 North Lake Steering Committee(NLSC)...............................................................................................13 6.1.2 Development of 2007 Work Plan..........................................................................................................14 6.1.3 Annual Spring Meeting.........................................................................................................................14 6.1.4 Plant ID Workshop...............................................................................................................................15 6.1.5 Boater Education..................................................................................................................................15 6.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION....................................................................................................................................15 6.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter.............................................................................................................................15 6.2.2 Public Notices.......................................................................................................................................15 6.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs...............................................................................................................16 6.2.4 Web Page Development........................................................................................................................16 6.2.5 Annual Report........................................................................................................................................16 7.0 2007 BUDGET REVIEW............................................................................................................................17 7.1 TASKS 1 &2 BUDGET,PROJECT ADMINISTRATION/VEGETATION MANAGEMENT......................................17 7.2 TASK 3 PUBLIC EDUCATION........................................................................................................................18 7.3 ECOLOGY GRANT BUDGET REVIEw............................................................................................................18 8.0 2007 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2007..........................................19 8.1 2007 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SUMMARY.............................................................................19 8.2 2008 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................19 8.3 2007 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY..........................................................................................................20 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 8.4 2008 PUBLIC EDUCATION RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................20 8.5 2007 ECOLOGY GRANT BUDGET SUMMARY...............................................................................................20 8.6 2007 ALGAE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................................20 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2007 North Lake Budget Overview..................................17 Table 2. 2007 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2..............................17 Table 3. 2007 North Lake Budget, Task 3......................................18 Table 4 North Lake Grant Running Balance..................................18 THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON SWM WEB PAGE (http://www.citvoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?page=1219) North Lake Grant Agreement 2006 DOE Aquatic Plant & Algae NPDES Permit AquaTechnex North Lake 2007 Year End Report 2007 North Lake YFI & PL Right of Entry Parcel Map NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution by all North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) members and the lake community who contributed to a successful aquatic plant management program in 2007. The Committee includes the following members: • Lake residents: Wendy Honey (Chairperson), Chuck Gibson (Co-Chair), Julie Cleary, Debra Hansen, Barry James, and James Chastain. • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Jennifer Hale. • City of Federal Way: Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Don Robinett(ESA&NPDES Coordinator). In addition, Surface Water Management (SWM) staff wishes to thank the City Council and City Manager for their collective support of our aquatic weed management efforts. We also recognize Kathy Hamel, Department of Ecology (Ecology), for her continuing aquatic plant management advice and expertise. NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The aquatic vegetation management actions and public education goals outlined in the North Lake 2007 Work Plan were successfully implemented. Noxious aquatic plants —fragrant water Illy, purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris and narrow leaf cattail — were targeted for control at as low a density as was environmentally and economically feasible, and at levels that did not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. In addition, an effective public education program was conducted that helped to prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants and non-native animal species to the lake. This program also aided in the early detection of aquatic weed re-infestations by continuing to involve the North Lake community in the aquatic plant management process. This annual report summarizes the steps taken by North Lake during 2007 to conform to the aquatic weed management program established in the 2004 Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP). 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development An Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP)is a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed control efforts. In 2004, the North Lake community coordinated with the King County Lake Stewardship group to develop an IAVMP. In addition to laying the groundwork for future aquatic weed work, an up- to-date IAVMP was required by the Department of Ecology (Ecology) to be submitted prior to seeking future grant funding from the State. With assistance from King County, the lake community began developing an IAVMP. During this period, efforts began to prepare an Ecology Aquatic Weeds Management Fund (AWMF) grant application. A series of meetings were held throughout the summer of 2004 to gather public comment and to finalize the IAVMP. Anticipating future annexation by the City of Federal Way, Surface Water Management staff began participating in the process. The IAVMP was submitted on September 16, 2004, and Ecology issued final approval for the plan on October 8. With an approved IAVMP, application was made to Ecology for an AWMF grant. Early in 2005, the North Lake community officially became incorporated into the City of Federal Way. As a result, an AWMF grant was awarded to the city that included a multi-year effort to fully eradicate the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The action plan included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education. The grant budget totaled approximately $80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. 1 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT The Grant Agreement is scheduled to expire no later than December 31, 2009. The Scope of Work is broken out into the following four tasks: Task 1 —Project Administration/Management Task 2—Vegetation Management Task 3 —Public Education Task 4—Reporting Task 1 (Project Administration/Management) involves the maintenance of project records; submittal of payment vouchers, fiscal forms and project reports; compliance with procurement and contracting requirements; attainment of all permits, licenses, easements of property rights; and submittal of all required performance items. Task 2 (Vegetation Management) and Task 3 (Public Education) are action items specifically required by this agreement, and are outlined and described in the 2007 North Lake Work Plan. Task 4 (Reporting) involves the preparation of a final report summarizing the actions taken during the entire period of the Grant Agreement. 2.2 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, tend to be invasive, and pose a serious threat to our State's water bodies, such as North Lake, if left unchecked. Because non-native plants have few natural controls in their new habitat, they spread rapidly, out-compete native plant and animal habitats, and degrade recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties(Ecology, 2006). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur, and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major classes (A, B and C) are listed according to the seriousness of the threat they pose to the state, or a region of the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class A Weeds detected in North Lake in 2007: • None 2 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level, with containment as the primary goal. Class B Weeds detected in North Lake in 2007: • Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a County option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. Class C Weeds detected in North Lake in 2007: • Fragrant water lily(Nymphaea odorata) • Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) In addition to the weeds listed above, Narrow leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) was positively identified as populating a single property near the north end of the lake. Although the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board has not classified this noxious weed, Narrow leaf cattail is currently on the noxious weed monitor list because it has caused considerable problems in the Midwest, and can hybridize with native cattail to form an even more invasive strain. Due to these factors, Ecology approved the addition of this noxious plant to the North Lake Grant Agreement scope of work, and it was targeted for herbicide treatment in 2007. 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT On March 31, 2006, an application for coverage under the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit(permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae in North Lake was submitted. The permit combined and replaced portions of the Aquatic Noxious Weed Control General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and the Aquatic Nuisance Weed and Algae Control General NPDES Permit that was issued prior to 2006. The NPDES permit (#WAG-994094) was issued to the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex on June 2, 2006. It governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The five- year permit expires on April 1, 2011. Ecology's new permit is issued under the authority of RCW 90.48. Such issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Ecology decided to issue a permit that is based solely on state authority to regulate the discharge of waste materials into waters of the state. 3 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 4.0 2007 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 4.1 Contract for Aquatic Vegetation Management In 2007,AquaTechnex, Inc. operated under the first year of a new two-year Professional Services Agreement (contract) with the City of Federal Way that is managed by SWM staff. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, and treatment with Ecology- approved aquatic herbicides),post control surveys,reports as required, and attending meetings as required. 4.2 Initial Systematic Survey On June 12, 2007, AquaTechnex performed an initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake. The survey team mapped all submerged, floating and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment). The location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake were recorded from the surface and subsurface. The plant survey on North Lake consisted of deploying a diver to perform a detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone while a crew member collected a number of rake samples (point intercept method) from the surface at various GPS points. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2007 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page).Native plant information may be found in Section 4.7. The point intercept sampling method consisted of using the WA Department of Ecology (DOE) protocols to sample aquatic plants. A rake toss was made using a double sided sampling rake at various GPS sampling stations across the littoral area of the lake. On retrieval of each toss, the plants present and species abundance were noted and recorded using a Trimble GeoXT datalogging GPS receiver Noxious weeds found during the North Lake initial systematic survey included: • Fragrant water lily(Nymphaea odroata) • Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) • Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) • Narrow leaf cattail(Typha angustifolia) The following is a discussion regarding the noxious weeds found during the initial survey. 4 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 4.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant waterlily(FWL)is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins, and can be recognized by the fragrant white,pink to purple,many-petaled flowers that float on the water surface. Their large, round, floating leaves have a distinctive slit on one side. Due to its attractiveness, this nonnative plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has been introduced to many lakes in Washington, but can be invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas (Ecology 2006). The June 12 survey located FWL growth in North Lake, and as with prior years, the colonies were noted to be emerging in areas along the shoreline perimeter. AquaTechnex recommended targeting this species with the aquatic herbicide glyphosate as necessary for complete eradication. 4.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable with its showy yellow flowers colorfully displayed along the edge of water and in wetlands. The flowers occur in late spring or early summer. The noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed), including flower stalk, will grow up to nearly five feet tall. The rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude native wetland species (WA State Noxious Weed Control Board). The initial survey found YFI populating the shoreline perimeter, but scattered in selected locations. Because the proposed control action would involve herbicide application to YFI on private property, permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required (see Section 4.3.2). Identical to the control plan implemented in 2005 and 2006, glyphosate was utilized for YFI treatments. Glyphosate provides effective long-term control, with applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide into the root system to ensure longer term control. 4.2.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This erect, robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an emergent, invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class C Weed(Ecology, 2006). PL colonies were reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake, although the survey occurred early in the growing season for this perennial weed. Because an aquatic plant survey only provides a snapshot of the conditions present in the lake at the time of the inspection, it was expected that additional PL seedlings would emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines later in the growing season. 5 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT Identical to YFI treatment, the proposed control action for PL would involve herbicide application on private property. Therefore, permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required(see Section 4.3.2). 4.2.4 Narrow leaf cattail Narrow leaf cattail is a herbaceous, rhizomatous, perennial plant with long, slender, green stalks topped with brown, fluffy, sausage-shaped flowering heads. It spreads both vegetatively and by seed, particularly under drawdown conditions, and is generally found in deeper water than native cattail. Narrow leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) is a non-native aquatic weed currently on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board "monitor list". This plant has not been classified yet based on the species stage of invasion, but the Board is keeping watch to see if it warrants addition to the Noxious Weed list. The initial survey found narrow leaf cattail populating a singular private shoreline at the north west corner of the lake. Permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required (see Section 4.3.2) because the proposed control action would involve herbicide application(glyphosate) on private property. 4.3 Herbicide Treatments The herbicide treatment program was designed to meet the requirements of both the Ecology Grant Agreement and NPDES permit. Within this framework, the Integrated Treatment Plan benchmarks were followed where practical. The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities into water bodies that are contiguous with rivers, creeks, and lakes; or into navigable waters. The applicator also must comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (AquaPro) was chosen as the preferred herbicide to treat FWL, YFI, PL and narrow leaf cattail on North Lake in 2007. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA)for aquatic applications. The active ingredient in glyphosate moves through the plant from the point of foliage contact into the root system. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days, seven days on more on most perennial weeds, and thirty days or more on most woody plants. It is known that extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects include gradual wilting and 6 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT yellowing of the plant, which will advance to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a fast-acting systemic herbicide effective in removing targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. 4.3.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication pursuant to the requirements outlined in the Ecology Grant Agreement. This aggressive plan was designed to achieve the following: • Gradually replace FWL with native vegetation over time to preserve and improve fish habitat. • Improve boater access and provide safer recreation opportunities, • Reduce the possibility of excessive amounts of dying vegetation that could contribute to increased nutrient loading(resulting in algae blooms). • Reduce the likelihood that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would place a demand on dissolved oxygen, thereby stressing aquatic life. The initial and follow-up glyphosate treatments of FWL were conducted on July 25, August 7, 8, and 15. It is characteristic to perform additional treatments such these during the growing season to effectively eradicate FWL populations. The AquaTechnex 2007 North Lake Year End Report (found on the SWM website) contains maps with locations of FWL colonies. Glyphosate (AquaPro), a liquid, was applied directly on the lily pads by a two-person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied (by licensed applicators) uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication to areas that did not uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated was approximately one acre. 4.3.2 Yellow Flag Iris and Purple Loosestrife Treatment Following the requirements outlined in the Grant Agreement, eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2007. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of the emergent weeds. Maps showing YFI and PL colony locations and all lake parcels granting access for treatment may be found on the SWM website. 7 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT YFI and PL colonies were treated on July 25, August 7, 8, and 15 with glyphosate. A final PL treatment was conducted on September 18. The YFI and PL-treated areas equaled approximately two acres. During treatment, AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate (AquaPro). The noxious weeds were either sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat, or from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex was careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses. For PL, spraying individual plant was deemed the most effective application method (versus wicking) given the issues of work efficiency and accessibility. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators) in the same fashion as that for FWL. 4.3.3 Narrow Leaf Cattail Treatment Pursuant to an approval received from the Department of Ecology to include Narrow leaf cattail to the North Lake treatment plan, a single stand of this invasive aquatic weed was treated on September 18 with glyphosate (less than one acre). During treatment, AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate (AquaPro). The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators)in the same fashion as that for the other targeted noxious species. 4.4 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM staff issued notices to all lake residents regarding proper hand pulling and digging techniques for YFI. For PL, hand removal methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks)were offered as effective options, including proper disposal of all organic debris(roots, seed heads and stems). On July 16, King County Noxious Weed Control Program staff performed manual removal of approximately 100 square feet of small vegetative PL plants along the shoreline near the "FW public boat launch property. All plants (including most roots) were removed and properly disposed of. In addition, Weyerhaeuser also actively removes PL from upland areas of their property as part of their annual weed control efforts. This effort is conducted outside of the city's Grant Agreement scope of work. AquaTechnex also undertook controls to manually remove PL seed heads. On August 8, the contractor removed accessible PL plants (some flowering and some with intact seed heads) all along the lake shoreline. 8 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 4.5 Water Lily Island Control Water lily islands have diminished in size and scope since 2005, particularly at the south end of the lake. As a result, lake access has improved tremendously following the volunteer efforts beginning in 2006 that eventually permanently opened and deepened water access for a number of lake residents. The NLSC agreed that floating FWL island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. In 2007, limited manual hand-work was conducted on several floating islands during the year. A total of nine (9) volunteer hours were completed by lake residents. 4.6 Weed Rakes The weed rake loan program continued in 2007, providing North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain the beneficial uses of the shoreline for fishing,boating and swimming. Weed rakes were only to be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline (not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the WDFW Aquatic Plants and Fish Pamphlet. Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes depending on the type of plant targeted: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. Because milfoil was not detected during the initial survey, weed rakes were loaned out immediately to lake residents impacted only by native weed infestations. Rakes were checked out to households until September 15 when the program was shut down for the season pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 4.7 Second Systematic Survey The second survey was performed on September 12. The objective was to quantify the vegetation present and to provide a continued baseline of the condition of the lake plant communities. Methods used were identical to the initial survey. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2007 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page). In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 4.0, the following native species have been known to inhabit North Lake: EMERGENT PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Cattail Typha spp. Native Spike Rush Eleocharis sp. Native Bull Rush Scirpus spp. Native 9 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Yellow pond lily Nuphar spp. Native Spatterdock Nuphar polysepalum Native Watershield Brasenia schreberi Native SUBMERSED PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Muskgrass Chara sp. Native Naiad Najas sp. Native Large leaf pondweed Potamogeton Amplifoious Native Clasping-leaf pondweed Potamogeton richardsonii Native American elodea Elodea Canadensis Native Bladderwort Utricularia sp. Native Northern watermilfoil Myriophyllum sibericum Native Emergent Plants Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species, Typha spp. (Cattail), Eleocharis sp. (Spike Rush), and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush), that grow in the shallow margins of a lake. The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals, and Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese. All North Lake's emergent vegetation provides habitat for amphibians and fish and help to stabilize shorelines. Floating Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and provides spawning habitat for fish. Nuphar polysepalum (Spatterdock) is a perennial waterlily-like plant that forms extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. When mature, Spatterdock has large elephant-ear- shaped leaves and yellow flowers. Brasenia schreberi (Water-shield) is a native plant, similar to water lily. It is identified by their long reddish leaf stalks attached to the centers of the floating oval leaves, giving them an umbrella-like appearance. Water-shield flowers are small, purplish, and rise slightly above the water. Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that reproduces from seed each year. The aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring, producing seeds, and then dropping them to the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. Although they have the potential to cause problems for swimmers and boaters in shallow waters, the absence of complaints indicate that beneficial uses of the lake have not yet been adversely impacted by this species. 10 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT Other submerged plant species in the lake included Potamogeton amplifolious (Large leaf pondweed) and Potamogeton richardsonii (Clasping leaf pondweed). These native members of the pondweed family occur in small clumps, and have been historically observed in similar density throughout the littoral lake zones. No negative reports from lake residents or users were received concerning increasing densities of these species. The native aquatic plant Elodea is found as an under story or secondary plant in the lake and has the potential to expand to the point of causing major problems. Chara (Muskgrass) is a macro algae and is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. Utricularia sp or Bladderwort was also present. Bladderworts are unique in the aquatic environment in that they are carnivorous, with a number of small bladders along the stems and leaves. The is plant similar to milfoil,but the bladders distinguish it from that species. The AquaTechnex 2007 North Lake Year End Report states that the submerged aquatic plant growth present at the time of the survey did not appear to be interfering with the water uses designated for this lake community. The plants were observed to be well below the lake surface, with good bottom coverage. The plants were also noted to be generally low growing and not forming surface mats. 4.8 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on September 12, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the glyphosate herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2007 on the three targeted species (FWL, PL and YFI). A review of the aquatic plant communities on North Lake shorelines focused on the results of the control effort. The majority of treatment areas showed good signs of herbicide injury and the treatments were considered a success. Some additional Purple Loosestrife plants had flowered and were now visible and this was a concern. Most of them were small seedlings that had grown since the last visit to the lake. There were also a few larger plants now visible in the dense wetland growth on the undeveloped west shoreline that had not been visible in prior inspections. These were mapped and targeted for control. One solitary colony of the invasive thin leaf cattail was still present on the northwest corner of the lake and was scheduled for treatment. Milfoil plants were not observed at any location in the lake during the detailed boat survey. The native plant communities had not changed from the time of the first treatment. In addition, no areas in the littoral area of the lake populated by native aquatic weeds plant were impacting the recreational use of the lake. 11 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 4.9 Algae Cyanobacteria are common in freshwater lakes, frequently forming dense populations or water blooms in eutrophic (nutrient rich)waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are light, temperature,pH, and nutrient concentrations. Because of the potential that the blooms may occur, SWM staff issues annual algae information, and algae alerts when present, to all North Lake residents. The alerts caution residents and users of the presence of toxic-producing algae and recommends safe action to prevent exposure. In addition, the information concerning the Department of Ecology Algae Control Program is provided — a program that focuses on providing local governments with the tools they need to manage algae problems. A total of $250,000 will be earmarked each year to target blue-green algae due to the health risks posed to humans,pets, and livestock. In mid-April, SWM received a complaint concerning an unusual murkiness of North Lake. At the request of SWM staff, Department of Ecology DOE conducted an algal bloom test on North Lake in response to residents concerns over the persistent murky water condition in North Lake. A sample was collected by Department of Ecology staff on April 26, 2007. The testing indicated that more than a dozen different species of freshwater micro-organisms (including algae and diatoms) were detected and identified by the King County Environmental Lab, but none were at concentrations of concern for Ecology or the Department of Health. The murky nature of North Lake appears to have been due to a natural spring bloom of diatoms. 5.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING During the first two years of the Ecology Grant Agreement (2005 and 2006), SWM Water Quality personnel collected herbicide samples from North Lake in the water column before and after treatment (2,4-D and glyphosate in 2005, and glyphosate only in 2006). The sampling effort was required by the Grant Agreement, and was undertaken to determine lake concentrations of herbicides, and to provide an analytical measurement of the contractor's performance. Background samples (before treatment) and post treatment samples were collected at time intervals prescribed in the Grant Agreement. Samples were taken in the middle of the lake (outside the treatment areas), and inside an individual treatment site and analyzed for the targeted herbicides. The sampling results obtained during the first two years of monitoring detected very low concentrations. Additionally, there was limited persistence of the herbicides in the water column after initial application. For these reasons, sampling in 2007 per the Grant Agreement was waived by Ecology. 12 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 6.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The elements of the Education and Public Involvement Program for North Lake are based primarily on the Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). The Ecology Grant Agreement incorporates the information in the IAVMP, forming two primary components for Education and Public Involvement. The two components focus on prevention and detection of noxious aquatic and emergent weeds, and lake stewardship. The North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) oversees the implementation of the Ecology Grant Agreement, which is outlined in the 2007 North Lake Work Plan. 6.1 Community Involvement North Lake Community Involvement program for 2007 involved the following: 6.1.1 North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) The NLSC is charged with setting the aquatic plant management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. The NLSC is comprised of North Lake residents, Weyerhaeuser representatives and City of Federal Way staff. The Committee meets quarterly, or more often as necessary to implement Work Plan goals. The following members comprise the NLSC: Lake Residents Wendy Honey—(Chair) Debra Hansen Chuck Gibson—(Co-Chair) Barry James Julie Cleary James Chastain Weverhaueser Representitive Jennifer Hale City of Federal Way Dan Smith, Surface Water Management Don Robinett, Surface Water Management The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities of the NLSC: • Reviews annual plant survey information. • Develops an annual aquatic plant management Work Plan based upon the information revealed in the annual plant surveys. The Work Plan prioritizes aquatic weed problem areas, identifies preferred control methods for each species, and develops the anticipated budget. • Assists the City of Federal Way with oversight of control work to keep contractors accountable. 13 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT • Participates in preparation of an annual evaluation report that summarizes plant control activities, lake-user's perspectives on the plant community, and recommendations for the next year's control strategy. • Assists with presentation of aquatic plant management efforts to lake residents at an annual community meeting and Plant ID Workshop. • Helps the City of Federal Way to ensure that all lake residents receive proper notification pursuant to the requirements of the Aquatic Plant&Algae NPDES Permit. • Participates in other annual community involvement/education strategies and plant control efforts as needed. The NLSC met two times in 2008. The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. The following are brief abstracts from each NLSC meeting: 6.1.2 Development of 2007 Work Plan In May, the draft 2007 North Lake Aquatic Plant Management Draft Work Plan(Work Plan)was sent to all committee members via email for their comment. The goals and budget were based upon both the requirements outlined in the IAVMP and the specific requirements prescribed by the Ecology Grant Agreement. No comments were received, therefore SWM staff finalized the Work Plan,which included the goals and anticipated budget for the up-coming year. The following is a brief outline of the 2007 Work Plan: Task 1: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted invasive aquatic weeds (milfoil, fragrant water Illy, purple loosestrife, and yellow flag iris), and other problematic aquatic plant issues (i.e. mud island removal) for the year. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 4.0. Task 2: Public Education describes all public education elements to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of invasive aquatic weeds. Items included in Task 2 include: annual community meeting(spring) and annual Plant ID Workshop (summer); quarterly newsletter(The Lake View); boater outreach program; printing and distribution of educational flyers; web site development; and development of an annual report. 6.1.3 Annual Spring Meeting The annual North Lake Spring Community Meeting was waived in 2007 due to historically poor attendance at this event. In lieu of the meeting, SWM staff mailed out copies of the final 2007 North Lake Work Plan to all lake residents, with a letter explaining the 2007 program. Comments were also requested,however no comments were received. 14 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 6.1.4 Plant ID Workshop A joint Steel Lake—North Lake Plant ID Workshop was held on July 8 at Steel Lake Park. This event provided an atmosphere of learning within a social setting. Residents from both lakes were presented information describing each aquatic plant management program. They were also able to pose questions to Surface Water Management (SWM) staff, AquaTechnex personnel and individual NLSC members. North Lake residents were afforded the opportunity to review the 2007 Work Plan and examine maps depicting noxious weed infestation areas and proposed treatment locations. In addition, various public education displays provided hands-on opportunities for individuals to view both native and noxious plants (good and bad) retrieved from their lake. Both SWM staff and lake residents harvested the live plant specimens found in North Lake for the displays. 6.1.5 Boater Education On opening day of fishing season, a local Boy Scout Troop handed out Milfoil Education Brochures to boaters at the North Lake Boat Ramp. Although boater turnout was low due to inclement weather, the brochure outlined the detrimental effect milfoil has on fresh water lakes, the propagation of the noxious plant, and how to properly clean vessels prior to entering or leaving the boating area. 6.2 Public Education The North Lake Public Education program for 2007 involved the following: 6.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter SWM staff continued issuing the quarterly public education newsletter, The Lake View to all North Lake residents via US Postal Service; and to lake residents and interested parties via an email subscribe list. The newsletter, created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, includes updates to lake residents concerning recent vegetation management activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 6.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via mail and email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. Lake residents were also sent notices prior to all public meetings. During the course of 2007, SWM staff mailed out formal public notices and emailed supplemental notices to lake residents. All public notices were posted on the North Lake web page. In addition, periodic supplemental updates advising lake residents of work plan activities were e-mailed to E-Subscribe participants approximately 24 hours prior to the activity on the lake. 15 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 6.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs SWM staff developed and distributed the following lake-related informational flyers: • Milfoil • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Blue Green Algae • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program 6.2.4 Web Page Development In 2007, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • Current IAVMP (with figures and maps) • 2007 Work Plan • Chronology and description of important 2006 North Lake activities • North Lake publications such as: The Lake View; informative flyers(milfoil,blue-green algae,purple loosestrife, ducks& geese,yellow flag iris, good plants/bad plants); public notices; and NLSC Meeting notes. 6.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops a final year-end report to all lake residents and parties of interest that describes the activities and a budget review of the prior year. 16 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 7.0 2007 BUDGET REVIEW The 2007 Work Plan budget was calculated based upon the scope of aquatic weed management expected to be accomplished during the year. Table 1 below provides an overview of the final North Lake aquatic plant management budget costs for 2007: Table 1. 2007 North Lake Budget Overview TASK Estimates Actual Expenses Task 1 &2, Project $11,995 $10,936 Administration/Vegetation Management Task 3, Public Education $4,230 $4,347 YEAR END $16,225 $15,283 7.1 Tasks 1 & 2 Budget, Project Administration/Vegetation Management Table 2 below illustrates the grant-eligible budgeted elements for Task 1 and 2. Table 2. 2007 North Lake Budget, TASK 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation Mgmt. GOAL 2007 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Annual Permit Fee for 2008 coverage) $338.00 $357.00 New contract RFP Advertisement $0 $43.82 Two diver surveys(Spring&Summer $2,024.00 $1.012.16 Weed rake $0 $97.91 Milfoil herbicide treatment $762.00 $0 Fragrant water lily herbicide treatment $480.00 $2,111,33 Yellow flag iris,purple loosestrife and narrow leaf cattail treatment $480.00 $2,111.33 Diver removal of milfoil $590.00 $0 Advance resident notifications&shoreline $705.00 $606.89 posting Native weed manual removal $1,350.00 $0 Water lily island control $0 $0 Post control visual inspection $751.00 $750.72 Contractor final report $0 $0 Contractor attendance at meetings $915.00 $0 Grant-eligible SWM staff wages and benefits $2,250.00 $1,692.00 Grant-eligible lake volunteer time $1,350.00 $2.153.00 TOTALS $11,995.00 $10,936.16 Note: The 2008 Weed Permit Fee($357.00)was not a grant eligible expense. 17 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 7.2 Task 3 Public Education Table 3 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 3. Table 3. 2007 North Lake Budget, TASK 3 Public Education GOAL 2007 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Refreshments&supplies for quarterly $60.00 $10.63 meetings Quarterly newsletter Lakeview $350.00 $309.08 SWM Annual Lake Report $120.00 $0 Annual Spring Community Meeting $0 $0 Plant ID workshop/cookout $200.00 $0 Public education printings $150.00 $80.47 Boater outreach program $0 $9.41 City LIVID web page $0 $0 Grant-eligible SWM staff wages and benefits $2,750.00 $3,022.00 Grant-eligible lake volunteer time $600.00 $915.00 TOTALS $4,230.00 $4,346.59 7.3 Ecology Grant Budget Review Table 5 below summarizes the running balance of the Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund grant for North Lake, set to expire December 31, 2009: Table 4. North Lake Grant Running Balance Year Grant Funds Used Running Balance Start N/A $60,158 2005 $18,882 $41,276 2006 $14,849 $26,427 2007 $11,246 $15,181 18 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 8.0 2007 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2007 The following discussion summarizes the 2006 North Lake program, and outlines recommendations for 2008: 8.1 2007 Aquatic Vegetation Management Summary The NLSC agreed that the aquatic vegetation management actions included in the 2007 Work Plan were fully implemented and that program spending did not exceed the beginning of the year budget estimates. Targeted weeds — FWL, PL and YFI — continued to be controlled. The following outlines the major 2007 developments worth noting: • The on-going success of the zero-tolerance milfoil eradication program was evidenced by the absence of the noxious weed found during the survey. As a result, 2,4-D (or equivalent) was not applied, saving program funds and eliminating concerns regarding ecological impacts of the herbicide. • Both SWM staff and NLSC Committee members agreed that herbicide treatments for FWL,YFI and PL were mostly effective in 2007. 8.2 2008 Aquatic Vegetation Management Recommendations The following outlines recommendations for 2008: • Continue implementing annual Work Plan, including conducting annual surveys and controlling noxious plants when documented. • Due to a Grant fund balance, the North Lake community should begin to seriously consider moving forward with LMD formation. Grant funds should only be enough to carry the aquatic weed management efforts through 2008. • Continue to stress open, frequent, and accurate communication with the contractor. • Continue to solicit contractor oversight assistance and follow-up observations from lake residents so that issues concerning poor treatment effectiveness can be addressed in a timely manner. • Conduct a more aggressive outreach to the property owners with purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris who have not granted access to treat. • Hold a Plant ID Workshop every two years instead of annually. 19 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT 8.3 2007 Public Education Summary A wide variety of Public Education products were offered and distributed in 2007. In addition to the quarterly newsletter, the LMD distributed a blue/green algae program public notice, milfoil boater education brochures, good plant/bad plant flyers, Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese flyers, and a newly developed Be a Lake Steward flyer. The lake steward flyer describes everyday practices lake residents can adopt to help improve aquatic weed control and water quality of the lake. 8.4 2008 Public Education Recommendations • Continue aggressive public education effort targeting all lake properties identified as being infested with noxious weeds in order to prevent their spread. • Implement more efficient volunteer timesheet recordkeeping and submittal procedure. • Because there were problems with lake residents submitting volunteer hours in a timely fashion, a better system needs to be implemented in order for Grant Payment Request to be submitted to Ecology on time on a bi-annual basis. 8.5 2007 Ecology Grant Budget Summary North Lake completed the third year of the Ecology AWMF Grant. At the end of 2007, $15,181 was remaining from the initial $60,000 grant. Based on the expected annual expenditures for aquatic plant management, it is likely that all grant funds will be used after the 2008 season. Throughout 2007, the NLSC continued discussions concerning possible Lake Management District (LMD) formation after grant expiration. The committee benefited by participating in joint-meetings with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, learning that utility formation takes months of public process. It is expected that the NLSC will continue considering LMD formation, and begin a formal plan of action in 2008. 8.6 2007 Algae Summary SWM staff were well prepared in 2007 to alert lake residents to possible blue-green algae blooms. SWM staff will continued to follow development of the evolving Department of Ecology algae program throughout 2008 to keep informed concerning funding options, sampling protocols, and the development of new public health standards. 20 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2007 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE Aquatic Weed Management Program 2008 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Author: Dan Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................................1 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................................................1 2.2 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM....................................................................................................................2 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT......................................................................................3 4.0 2006 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES..........................................................................4 4.1 CONTRACT FOR AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT................................................................................4 4.2 INITIAL SYSTEMATIC SURVEY.......................................................................................................................4 4.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily.................................................................................................................................4 4.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris.......................................................................................................................................5 4.2.3 Purple Loosestrife....................................................................................................................................5 4.2.4 Narrow leaf cattail...................................................................................................................................6 4.3 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS..............................................................................................................................6 4.3.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment...............................................................................................................7 4.3.2 Yellow Flag Iris&Purple Loosestrife Treatment...................................................................................7 4.3.3 Narrow Leaf Cattail Treatment...............................................................................................................8 4.4 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL...................................................................................................................8 4.5 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL....................................................................................................................8 4.6 WEED RAKES................................................................................................................................................8 4.7 SECOND SYSTEMATIC SURVEY.....................................................................................................................9 4.8 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT.........................................................................................................11 4.11 ALGAE........................................................................................................................................................11 5.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................................................................12 6.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT...............................................................................................12 6.1 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT.......................................................................................................................12 6.1.1 North Lake Steering Committee(NLSC)...............................................................................................12 6.1.2 Development of 2008 Work Plan..........................................................................................................14 6.1.3 Spring Meeting......................................................................................................................................14 6.1.4 Plant ID Workshop...............................................................................................................................15 6.1.5 Boater Education..................................................................................................................................15 6.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION....................................................................................................................................15 6.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter.............................................................................................................................15 6.2.2 Public Notices.......................................................................................................................................15 6.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs...............................................................................................................15 6.2.4 Press Releases.......................................................................................................................................16 6.2.5 Web Page Development........................................................................................................................16 6.2.6 Annual Report........................................................................................................................................16 7.0 2008 BUDGET REVIEW............................................................................................................................17 7.1 TASKS 1 &2 BUDGET,PROJECT ADMINISTRATION/VEGETATION MANAGEMENT......................................17 7.2 TASK 3 PUBLIC EDUCATION........................................................................................................................18 7.3 ECOLOGY GRANT BUDGET REVIEw............................................................................................................18 8.0 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT.........................................................................18 9.0 2008 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2009..........................................21 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 9.1 2008 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SUMMARY.............................................................................21 9.2 2009 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................21 9.3 2008 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY..........................................................................................................22 9.4 2009 PUBLIC EDUCATION RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................22 9.5 2008 ECOLOGY GRANT BUDGET SUMMARY...............................................................................................22 9.6 2008 ALGAE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................................22 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2008 North Lake Budget Overview...................................17 Table 2. 2008 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2...............................17 Table 3. 2008 North Lake Budget, Task 3.......................................18 Table 4. North Lake Grant Running Balance..................................18 Table 5. LIVID Assessment........................................................... 20 THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON SWM WEB PAGE (http://www.citvoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?paqe=713) North Lake Grant Agreement 2006 DOE Aquatic Plant & Algae NPDES Permit AquaTechnex North Lake 2008 Year End Report 2008 North Lake YFI & PL Right of Entry Parcel Map NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by all North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC)members and the lake community who contributed to the successful 2008 aquatic plant management program. The Committee includes the following members: • Lake residents: Wendy Honey (Chairperson), Chuck Gibson (Co-Chair), Julie Cleary, Debra Hansen, Barry James, and James Chastain • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Megan Lum • City of Federal Way: Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Don Robinett(ESA&NPDES Coordinator) In addition, Surface Water Management (SWM) staff wishes to thank the City Council and City Manager for their collective support of our aquatic weed management efforts. We also recognize Kathy Hamel, Department of Ecology (Ecology), for her continuing aquatic plant management advice and encouragement. NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2008, the aquatic vegetation management actions and public education goals outlined in the North Lake 2008 Work Plan were successfully implemented. Noxious aquatic plants —fragrant water lily,purple loosestrife,yellow flag iris and narrow leaf cattail—were targeted for control at as low a density as was environmentally and economically feasible, and at levels that did not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. In addition, an effective public education program was conducted that helped to prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants and non-native animal species to the lake. This program also aided in the early detection of aquatic weed re-infestations by continuing to involve the North Lake community in the aquatic plant management process. This annual report summarizes the steps taken by North Lake during 2008 to conform to the aquatic weed management program established in the 2004 Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP)—a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed eradication efforts in North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development An Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP)is a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed control efforts. In 2004, the North Lake community coordinated with the King County Lake Stewardship group to develop an IAVMP. In addition to laying the groundwork for future aquatic weed work, an up- to-date IAVMP was required by the Department of Ecology (Ecology) to be submitted prior to seeking future grant funding from the State. With assistance from King County, the lake community began developing an IAVMP. During this period, efforts began to prepare an Ecology Aquatic Weeds Management Fund (AWMF) grant application. A series of meetings were held throughout the summer of 2004 to gather public comment and to finalize the IAVMP. Anticipating future annexation by the City of Federal Way, Surface Water Management staff began participating in the process. The IAVMP was submitted on September 16, 2004, and Ecology issued final approval for the plan on October 8. With an approved IAVMP, application was made to Ecology for an AWMF grant. Early in 2005, the North Lake community officially became incorporated into the City of Federal Way. As a result, an AWMF grant was awarded to the city that included a multi-year effort to fully eradicate the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The action plan included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, 1 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT control, and public education. The grant budget totaled approximately $80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The Grant Agreement is scheduled to expire no later than December 31, 2009. The Scope of Work is broken out into the following four tasks: Task 1 —Project Administration/Management Task 2—Vegetation Management Task 3 —Public Education Task 4—Reporting Task 1 (Project Administration/Management) involves the maintenance of project records; submittal of payment vouchers, fiscal forms and project reports; compliance with procurement and contracting requirements; attainment of all permits, licenses, easements of property rights; and submittal of all required performance items. Task 2 (Vegetation Management) and Task 3 (Public Education) are action items specifically required by this agreement, and are outlined and described in the 2008 North Lake Work Plan. Task 4 (Reporting) involves the preparation of a final report summarizing the actions taken during the entire period of the Grant Agreement. 2.2 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, tend to be invasive, and pose a serious threat to our State's water bodies — such as North Lake — if left unchecked. Because non-native plants have few natural controls in their new habitat, they spread rapidly, out-compete native plant and animal habitats, and degrade recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties (Ecology, 2006). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur, and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major classes (A, B and C) are listed according to the seriousness of the threat they pose to the state, or a region of the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. 2 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a County option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. The joint efforts undertaken by the North Lake Steering Committee, lake residents, and SWM staff are described in this year-end report. The document also outlines the work completed to eradicate the following three noxious weed species detected in 2008: Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Fragrant water lily Nymphaea odorata C Yellow flag iris Iris pseudacorus C Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria B In addition to the weeds listed above, Narrow leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) was positively identified as populating a single property near the north end of the lake in 2007. Although the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board has not classified this noxious weed, Narrow leaf cattail is currently on the noxious weed monitor list because it has caused considerable problems in the Midwest, and can hybridize with native cattail to form an even more invasive strain. Due to these factors, Ecology approved the addition of this noxious plant to the North Lake Grant Agreement scope of work. It was targeted for herbicide treatment in 2007, and again in 2008. 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT On March 31, 2006, an application for coverage under the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit(permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae in North Lake was submitted. The permit combined and replaced portions of the Aquatic Noxious Weed Control General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and the Aquatic Nuisance Weed and Algae Control General NPDES Permit that was issued prior to 2006. The permit (#WAG-994094) was issued to the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex on June 2, 2006. It governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The five-year permit expires on April 1, 2011. Ecology's new permit is issued under the authority of RCW 90.48. Such issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Ecology decided to issue a permit that is based solely on state authority to regulate the discharge of waste materials into waters of the state. 3 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 4.0 2006 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 4.1 Contract for Aquatic Vegetation Management In 2008, AquaTechnex, Inc. operated under the last year of a two-year Professional Services Agreement (contract) with the City of Federal Way that is managed by SWM staff. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides),post control surveys,reports as required, and attending meetings as required. 4.2 Initial Systematic Survey Due to a late start to the growing season, AquaTechnex did not complete the initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake until July 11, 2008. The survey team mapped all submerged, floating and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. In addition to making a visual inspection, the survey team collected a number of rake samples at various GPS points. These points were collected to define each treatment area through diver communication to the mapping vessel team. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2008 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page). Native plant information may be found in Section 4.7. Although colonies of Eurasian watermilfoil (milfoil)were distributed throughout the littoral area in the northern and central part of North Lake in 2005, no milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) has been detected since. The 2005 herbicide treatment with 2,4-D appeared to be successful in completely eradicating this State of Washington Class B Weed from North Lake. Noxious weeds found during the North Lake initial systematic survey include: • Fragrant water lily(Nymphaea odroata) • Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) • Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) • Narrow leaf cattail(Typha angustifolia) The following is a discussion regarding the noxious weeds found during the initial survey. 4.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant waterlily(FWL)is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins, and can be recognized by the fragrant white,pink to purple,many-petaled flowers that float on the water surface. Their large, round, floating leaves have a distinctive slit on one side. Due to its attractiveness, this nonnative plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has been introduced to 4 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT many lakes in Washington, but can be invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas (Ecology 2006). The July 11 survey located sparse FWL growth in North Lake, and as with prior years, the colonies were noted in selected areas along the shoreline perimeter. The population densities of FWL were reported to be declining in response to treatments, and nearly eliminated in developed shoreline areas at the north end of the lake. Based on the survey results, AquaTechnex recommended targeting this species with the aquatic herbicide glyphosate (Rodeo) as necessary for complete eradication. 4.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable with its showy yellow flowers colorfully displayed along the edge of water and in wetlands. The flowers occur in late spring or early summer. The noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed), including flower stalk, will grow up to nearly five feet tall. The rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude native wetland species (WA State Noxious Weed Control Board). The initial survey found YFI populating the shoreline perimeter, but scattered in selected locations, primarily where permission to treat was not provided by the land owners (see Section 4.3.2). Identical to the control plan implemented during the last three seasons, glyphosate (Rodeo) would be utilized for YFI treatments. Glyphosate provides effective long-term control, with applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide into the root system. 4.2.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This erect, robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class C Weed(Ecology, 2006). The noxious emergent plant was reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake, although the survey occurred early in the growing season for this perennial weed. Because an aquatic plant survey only provides a snapshot of the conditions present in the lake at the time of the inspection, it was expected that additional PL seedlings would emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines later in the growing season. Identical to YFI treatment, the proposed control action for PL would involve herbicide application on private property. Therefore, permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required(see Section 4.3.2). 5 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 4.2.4 Narrow leaf cattail Narrow leaf cattail is a herbaceous, rhizomatous, perennial plant with long, slender, green stalks topped with brown, fluffy, sausage-shaped flowering heads. It spreads both vegetatively and by seed, particularly under drawdown conditions, and is generally found in deeper water than native cattail. Narrow leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) is a non-native aquatic weed currently on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board "monitor list". This plant has not been classified yet based on the species stage of invasion, but the Board is keeping watch to see if it warrants addition to the Noxious Weed list. The initial survey found a dwindling stand of narrow leaf cattail populating a singular private shoreline at the northwest corner of the lake. The 2007 herbicide treatment was effective at the margins of the stand, but internal plant sections were noted to be surviving in 2008. This was supported by observations made by Jenifer Parsons (Department of Ecology) during a survey the first week of June. 4.3 Herbicide Treatments The herbicide treatment program was designed to meet the requirements of both the Ecology Grant Agreement and NPDES permit. Within this framework, Year Two Integrated Treatment Plan benchmarks were followed where practical. The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities into water bodies that are contiguous with rivers, creeks, and lakes; or into navigable waters. The applicator also must comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (Rodeo) was used to treat FWL, YFI, PL and narrow leaf cattail on North Lake in 2006. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) for aquatic applications. The active ingredient in glyphosate moves through the plant from the point of foliage contact into the root system. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days, seven days on more on most perennial weeds, and thirty days or more on most woody plants. It is known that extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects include gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which will advance to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. 6 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a fast-acting systemic herbicide effective in removing targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. 4.3.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication pursuant to the requirements outlined in the Ecology Grant Agreement. The plan was designed to achieve the following: • Gradually replace FWL with native vegetation over time to preserve and improve fish habitat. • Improve boater access and provide safer recreation opportunities, • Reduce the possibility of excessive amounts of dying vegetation that could contribute to increased nutrient loading(resulting in algae blooms). • Reduce the likelihood that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would place a demand on dissolved oxygen, thereby stressing aquatic life. The AquaTechnex 2006 North Lake Year End Report (found on the SWM website) contains maps with locations of FWL colonies. Glyphosate (Rodeo), a liquid, was applied directly on the Illy pads by a two-person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied (by licensed applicators) uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication to areas that did not uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated equaled less than one acre. The first glyphosate application of FWL was conducted on the morning of August 1. A second and final application occurred August 28. 4.3.2 Yellow Flag Iris & Purple Loosestrife Treatment Following the requirements outlined in the Grant Agreement, eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2008. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of the emergent weeds. Maps showing YSI and PL colony locations and all lake parcels granting access for treatment may be found on the SWM website. YFI and PL colonies were treated on August 1, follow-up spot treatment occurred on August 28. The YFI and PL-treated areas in 2008 totaled less than one acre. During treatment, AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate (Rodeo). The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex was careful not to impact adjacent 7 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT ornamental plants or grasses. For PL, spraying individual plant was deemed the most effective application method (versus wicking) given the issues of work efficiency and accessibility. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators) in the same fashion as that for FWL. 4.3.3 Narrow Leaf Cattail Treatment The single stand of this invasive aquatic weed was treated on August 1 with glyphosate. Permission (right of entry) from the affected landowner was obtained because the proposed control action would involve herbicide application (glyphosate) on private property. The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied (by licensed applicators) in the same fashion as that for the other targeted noxious species. 4.4 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM staff issued notices to all lake residents regarding proper hand pulling and digging techniques for YFI. For PL, hand removal methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks)were offered as effective options, including proper disposal of all organic debris(roots, seed heads and stems). 4.5 Water Lily Island Control Water lily islands have decreased considerably around the lake, particularly at the south end of the lake. As a result, lake access has improved tremendously following the volunteer efforts beginning in 2006 that eventually permanently opened and deepened water access for a number of lake residents. The NLSC agreed that floating FWL island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. 4.6 Weed Rakes The weed rake loan program continued in 2008, providing North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain the beneficial uses of the shoreline for fishing,boating and swimming. Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline (not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the "FW Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet. Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes depending on the type of plant targeted: a rake with a sharp cutting blade 8 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. Because milfoil was not detected during the initial survey, weed rakes were loaned out immediately to lake residents impacted only by native weed infestations. Rakes were checked out to approximately three households until September 15 when the program was shut down for the season pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 4.7 Second Systematic Survey The second survey was performed on August 21. The objective was to quantify the vegetation present and to provide a continued baseline of the condition of the lake plant communities. Methods used were identical to the initial survey. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2008 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page). In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 4.0, the native species documented during the second systematic survey was reported to be identical to 2007 populations and included: EMERGENT PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Cattail Typha spp. Native Spike Rush Eleocharis sp. Native Bull Rush Scirpus spp. Native FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Yellow pond lily Nuphar spp. Native Spatterdock Nuphar polysepalum Native Watershield Brasenia schreberi Native SUBMERSED PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Muskgrass Chara sp. Native Naiad Na/as sp. Native Large leaf pondweed Potamogeton Amplifoious Native Clasping-leaf pondweed Potamogeton richardsonii Native American elodea Elodea Canadensis Native Bladderwort Utricularia sp. Native Northern watermilfoil Myriophyllum sibericum Native Emergent Plants Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species, Typha spp. (Cattail), Eleocharis sp. (Spike Rush), and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush), that grow in the shallow margins of a lake. The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals. Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese. All of North 9 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT Lake's emergent vegetation provides habitat for amphibians and fish and help to stabilize shorelines. Floating Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and provides spawning habitat for fish. Nuphar polysepalum (Spatterdock) is a perennial waterlily-like plant that forms extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. When mature, Spatterdock has large elephant-ear- shaped leaves and yellow flowers. Brasenia schreberi (Water-shield) is a native plant, similar to water lily. They are identified by their long reddish leaf stalks attached to the centers of the floating oval leaves which give them an umbrella-like appearance. Water-shield flowers are small,purplish, and rise slightly above the water. Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that dominates the lake bottom. Unlike most other perennial aquatic plants, it reproduces from seed each year. The aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring, produces seeds that drop them to the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. AquaTechnex reports that the areas in the northern area of the lake that were dominated by Najas sp. become extremely dense by mid summer. Although these plants have the potential to cause problems for swimmers and boaters in shallow waters, the absence of complaints indicate that beneficial uses of the lake have not yet been adversely impacted by this species. Other submerged plant species in the lake include Potamogeton amplifolious (Large leaf pondweed) and Potamogeton richardsonii (Clasping leaf pondweed) and Potamogeton praelongus (White stemmed pondweed). These native members of the pondweed family occur in small clumps and were observed in similar density throughout the remaining deeper littoral lake zones. Because of their depth, these plants did not appear to be impacting beneficial uses of the lake. The native aquatic plant Elodea acts as an under story or secondary plant in the lake, and can expand to the point of causing major problems. The absence of complaints from lake residents concerning this species indicate that beneficial uses were not impacted. Chara (Muskgrass) is a macro algae and is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. Utricularia sp or Bladderworts are unique in the aquatic environment in that they are carnivorous, with a number of small bladders along the stems and leaves. The plant is similar to milfoil,but the bladders distinguish it from that species. 10 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT Assuming that there are no changes in the plant density from 2007, North Lake remains well within the WDFW and Ecology criteria for a minimum of 35% native vegetation littoral zone coverage to support good fish habitat. 4.8 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on August 21, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the glyphosate herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2008 on the four targeted species (FWL, PL,YFI and narrow leaf cattail). The cool and prolonged spring weather prevented a normal start to aquatic plant management activities in 2008. In addition, continued wet weather throughout the summer delayed treatments. As a result, maximum control may have not been achieved compared to past years. In all, the densities of all targeted species have been reduced,but not fully eradicated. The AquaTechnex Final report states that the 2008 control efforts provided good results in all areas treated,with visible signs of herbicide injury: • FWL is close to being eliminated. • YFI continues to remain on properties not providing rights of entry for treatment. • Shoreline stands of PL are close to being eliminated, but the presence of seedlings each year indicate that a seed bank has been established. • The stand of Narrow leaf cattail showed signs of extreme browning. 4.11 Algae Cyanobacteria are common in freshwater lakes, frequently forming dense populations or water blooms in eutrophic (nutrient rich)waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are light, temperature,pH, and nutrient concentrations. Because of the potential that the blooms may occur, SWM staff issues annual algae information, and algae alerts when present, to all North Lake residents. The alerts caution residents and users of the presence of toxic-producing algae and recommends safe action to prevent exposure. In addition, the information concerning the Department of Ecology Algae Control Program is provided — a program that focuses on providing local governments with the tools they need to manage algae problems. A total of $250,000 will be earmarked each year to target blue-green algae due to the health risks posed to humans,pets, and livestock. In late June, SWM received a complaint from a lakefront owner concerning a possible toxic algae bloom. Upon review of electronic photographs, it was determined to be filamentous algae —harmless but unsightly.No further testing was conducted. 11 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 5.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING During the first two years of the Ecology Grant Agreement (2005 and 2006), SWM Water Quality personnel collected herbicide samples from North Lake in the water column before and after treatment (2,4-D and glyphosate in 2005, and glyphosate only in 2006). The sampling effort was required by the Grant Agreement, and was undertaken to determine lake concentrations of herbicides, and to provide an analytical measurement of the contractor's performance. Background samples (before treatment) and post treatment samples were collected at time intervals prescribed in the Grant Agreement. Samples were taken in the middle of the lake (outside the treatment areas), and inside an individual treatment site and analyzed for the targeted herbicides. The sampling results obtained during the first two years of monitoring detected very low concentrations. Additionally, there was limited persistence of the herbicides in the water column after initial application. For these reasons, sampling in 2007 and 2008 per the Grant Agreement was waived by Ecology. 6.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The elements of the Education and Public Involvement Program for North Lake are based primarily on the Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). The Ecology Grant Agreement incorporates the information in the IAVMP, forming two primary components for Education and Public Involvement. The two components focus on prevention and detection of noxious aquatic and emergent weeds, and lake stewardship. The North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) oversees the implementation of the Ecology Grant Agreement, which is outlined in the 2008 North Lake Work Plan. 6.1 Community Involvement North Lake Community Involvement program for 2008 involved the following: 6.1.1 North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) The NLSC is charged with setting the aquatic plant management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. The NLSC is comprised of North Lake residents, Weyerhaeuser representatives and City of Federal Way staff. The Committee meets quarterly, or more often as necessary to implement Work Plan goals. 12 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT The following members comprise the NLSC: Lake Residents Wendy Honey—(Chair) Debra Hansen Chuck Gibson—(Vice Chair) Barry James Julie Cleary James Chastain Weyerhaeuser Representative Megan Lum City of Federal Way Dan Smith, Surface Water Management Don Robinett, Surface Water Management The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities of the NLSC: • Reviews annual plant survey information. • Develops an annual aquatic plant management Work Plan based upon the information revealed in the annual plant surveys. The Work Plan prioritizes aquatic weed problem areas, identifies preferred control methods for each species, and develops the anticipated budget. • Assists the City of Federal Way with oversight of control work to keep contractors accountable. • Participates in preparation of an annual evaluation report that summarizes plant control activities, lake-user's perspectives on the plant community, and recommendations for the next year's control strategy. • Assists with presentation of aquatic plant management efforts to lake residents at an annual community meeting and Plant ID Workshop. • Helps the City of Federal Way to ensure that all lake residents receive proper notification pursuant to the requirements of the Aquatic Plant&Algae NPDES Permit. • Participates in other annual community involvement/education strategies and plant control efforts as needed. The NLSC met two times in 2008. The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. The following are brief abstracts from each NLSC meeting: May 8,2008 • Review of Ecology Grant funding balance (expires December 31, 2009). • Discussion of LMD development process. Committee representatives in attendance reaffirm their intention to form a LMD by the end of 2009. • Review of proposed 2008 Work Plan and budget. 13 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT October 8,2008 • Update information presented concerning balance of Ecology Grant funding. • Review of 2008 Work Plan accomplishments. • Committee agrees to offer a one-year contract extension to AquaTechnex. • Begin deciding key first elements of LMD formation, including: (1) scope, (2) costs, (3) boundary, and(4)rate structure. 6.1.2 Development of 2008 Work Plan On May 8, the NLSC discussed both the structure and content of the 2008 North Lake Aquatic Plant Management Draft Work Plan (Work Plan). The goals and budget were based upon both the requirements outlined in the IAVMP and the specific requirements prescribed by the Ecology Grant Agreement. Following the meeting, SWM staff finalized the Work Plan, which included the goals and anticipated budget for the up-coming year. The following is a brief outline of the 2008 Work Plan: Task 1: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted invasive aquatic weeds (milfoil, fragrant water Illy, purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris, and narrow leaf cattail), and other problematic aquatic plant issues (i.e. mud island removal) for the year. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 4.0. Task 2: Public Education describes all public education elements to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of invasive aquatic weeds. Items included in Task 2 include: community meetings (spring) and Plant ID Workshops (summer); quarterly newsletter(The Lake View); boater outreach program; printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases;web site development; and development of an annual report. 6.1.3 Spring Meeting Due to historically poor attendance, the North Lake Spring Community Meeting was not held this year. In year's past, the meeting was used to allow staff to review the efforts undertaken the previous year, allowing questions from lake residents to be addressed. In lieu of the meeting, SWM staff mailed out copies of the final 2008 North Lake Work Plan to all lake residents,with a letter explaining the 2008 program. Comments were also requested, however no comments were received. 14 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 6.1.4 Plant ID Workshop At the end of 2007, the North Lake committee agreed to hold the Plant ID Workshop every other year. This was due to declining attendance (most of the attendees are committee members that do not necessarily benefit from the education). It was noted that the poor attendance may have been a reflection of the program's success. As a result, the next Plant ID Workshop would not be held until 2009. In the interim, educational materials typically distributed during the workshop (Good Plant/Bad Plant) were made available on North Lake's web site year round and were discussed in the July 2008 issue of the newsletter. 6.1.5 Boater Education On April 26 (Opening Day of Fishing Season), five lake resident volunteers handed out approximately 30 Milfoil Education Brochures to boaters at the North Lake Boat Ramp. The brochure outlines the detrimental effect milfoil has on fresh water lakes, the propagation of the noxious plant, and reminds boaters to properly clean their vessels prior to entering or leaving the boating area. 6.2 Public Education The North Lake Public Education program for 2008 involved the following: 6.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter SWM staff continued issuing the quarterly public education newsletter, The Lake View to all North Lake residents via US Postal Service; and to lake residents and interested parties via an email subscribe list. The newsletter, created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, includes updates to lake residents concerning recent vegetation management activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 6.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via mail and email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. Lake residents were also sent notices prior to all public meetings. During the course of 2008, SWM staff mailed out three formal public notices and emailed approximately four supplemental notices to lake residents. All public notices were posted on the North Lake web page. In addition, periodic supplemental updates advising lake residents of work plan activities were e-mailed to E-Subscribe participants approximately 24 hours prior to the activity on the lake. 6.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs SWM staff developed and/or distributed the following lake-related informational flyers and brochures: 15 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT • Milfoil Boater Education • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Washington State Department of Health—Toxic Blue Green Algae • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program • Be Lake Steward 6.2.4 Press Releases At the request of the North Lake Steering Committee and Steel Lake Advisory Committee, SWM staff developed and distributed a press release on every day practices City residents can adopt which will help improve the water quality in the lake and reduce the propagation of invasive aquatic plants. The goal of the press release was to expand the publication education target audience to include lake users and City residents in the watershed. The press release was distributed on June 24, 2008. 6.2.5 Web Page Development In 2008, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • Current IAVMP (with figures and maps) • 2008 Work Plan • Chronology and description of important 2008 North Lake activities • North Lake publications such as: The Lake View; informative flyers(milfoil,blue-green algae,purple loosestrife, ducks& geese,yellow flag iris, good plants/bad plants);public notices; and NLSC Meeting notes. 6.2.6 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a final year-end report for all lake residents and parties of interest that describes the activities and a budget review of the prior year. 16 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 7.0 2008 BUDGET REVIEW The 2008 Work Plan budget was calculated based upon the scope of aquatic weed management expected to be accomplished during the year. Table 1 below provides an overview of the final North Lake aquatic plant management budget costs for 2008: Table 1. 2008 North Lake Budget Overview TASK Estimates Actual Expenses Task 1 &2, Project $10,935 $6,069 Administration/Vegetation Management Task 3, Public Education $4,200 $1,161 YEAR END $15,135 $7,230 7.1 Tasks 1 & 2 Budget, Project Administration/Vegetation Management Table 2 below illustrates the grant-eligible budgeted elements for Task 1 and 2. Table 2. 2008 North Lake Budget, TASK 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation Mgmt. GOAL 2008 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Annual Permit Fee for 2009 coverage) 338 397 Two diver surveys(Spring&Summer 2,024 2,029 Milfoil herbicide treatment 762 0 Fragrant water lily,yellow flag iris,purple 2,000 442 loosestrife and narrow leaf cattail treatment Diver removal of milfoil 590 0 Advance resident notifications&shoreline 705 353 posting Native weed manual removal 1,350 0 Water lily island control 0 0 Post control visual inspection 751 752 Contractor attendance at meetings 915 126 Contractor final report 0 0 Grant eligible SWM staff time 1,500 1,970 TOTALS 10,935 6,069 Note: The 2008 Weed Permit Fee($397.00)was not a grant eligible expense. 17 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 7.2 Task 3 Public Education Table 3 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 3. Table 3. 2008 North Lake Budget, TASK 3 Public Education GOAL 2008 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Meeting refreshments 50 16 Quarterly newsletter 500 255 Annual evaluation report 150 0 Annual Spring Community Meeting 0 0 Plant ID workshop/cookout 600 0 Public education printing 150 165 Boater outreach program 0 0 City LMD web page 0 0 Grant-eligible SWM staff wages and benefits 2,750 725 TOTALS 4,200 1,161 7.3 Ecology Grant Budget Review Table 4 below summarizes the running balance of the Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund grant for North Lake, set to expire December 31, 2009: Table 4. North Lake Grant Running Balance Year Grant Funds Used Running Balance Start N/A $60,158 2005 $18,882 $41,276 2006 $14,849 $26,427 2007 $11,246 $15,181 2008 $5,623 $9,558 8.0 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT In mid 2007, SWM staff began preparing the NLSC for the development of a Lake Management District (LMD) with a series of committee meetings. With the expectation that grant funding would be exhausted by the end of 2009, it was stressed that the process for LMD formation should begin near the end of 2008 in order to provide a continuous funding source. 18 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT The NLSC benefited by participating in joint-meetings with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, learning that utility formation takes months of public process. During the May 8, 2008 meeting, SWM staff requested that a formal letter from lake residents be issued to the City Manager which expresses their interest in forming a LMD for North Lake. A letter signed by 16 lake residents was received by Public Works on August 25. Soon after, SWM staff began assembling information concerning other Washington State LMDs. From this information, several assessment rate structure options were developed that reflected the various zoning types and quantity of parcels surrounding the lake. This information was presented to the NLSC on October 8. The committee was able to agree upon the following: scope, annual cost,boundary, and duration. Scope The NLSC agreed that the primary scope would include a continuation of the present aquatic weed management activities (annual surveys, selected control, and public education), and also include a limited water quality monitoring program based loosely on the previously discontinued King County Lake Stewardship program which was disbanded in 2005 when the city annexed North Lake. In addition, other items could be added as needed pursuant to the broader scope outlined in RCW 36.61.020. Annual Cost The annual cost was derived from the expected contractor services, printing and laboratory fees. In addition, SWM staff time would also be built into the annual expenses. Boundary It was agreed that the boundary only include lakefront properties. Duration The duration of the LMD would be for ten(10)years. The following is the LMD rate structure developed by SWM staff and presented at a public meeting on February 24, 2009: On December 8, SWM staff and NLSC Vice-Chair Chuck Gibson met with a Weyerhaeuser representative to provide basic LMD information and proposed assessment rates. It is anticipated that a draft petition (pursuant to RCW 36.61.030) that addresses the items listed above will be developed early in 2009. 19 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT Table 5. LMD Assessment Assessment Category Rate Revenue ($) Single Family Residential (RS9.6), Lakefront property Developed property(53 units) X$100.00 per unit $5,300 Vacant property(168 ft) X$0.70 per lakefront foot $118 Single Family Residential (RS9.6), Non-lakefront property with deeded lake access Developed property(1 unit) X$75.00 per unit $75 Vacant property(1 unit) X$15.00 per unit $15 Weyerhaeuser(RS9.6) Vacant property(82 ft) X$0.70 per lakefront foot $ 57 Weyerhaeuser(CP-1) Commercial property(3,714 ft) X$0.80 per lakefront foot $2,971 WDFW Public Boat Launch Single annual assessment $4,000 TOTAL ANNUAL ASSESSMENT $12,536 City of Federal Way Zoning Designations: Office Zone CP-1 Corporate Park-1 Single Family Residential RS9.6 0 unit/9,600 square feet) 20 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 9.0 2008 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2009 The following discussion summarizes the 2008 North Lake program, and outlines recommendations for 2009: 9.1 2008 Aquatic Vegetation Management Summary The NLSC agreed that the aquatic vegetation management actions included in the 2008 Work Plan were fully implemented. Targeted weeds — FWL, PL, YFI, and Narrow leaf cattail — continued to be controlled. The following outlines the major 2008 developments worth noting: • The NLSC • The on-going success of the zero-tolerance milfoil eradication program was evidenced by the absence of the noxious weed found during the survey. As a result, 2,4-D (or equivalent) was not applied, saving program funds and eliminating concerns regarding ecological impacts of the herbicide. • Both SWM staff and NLSC Committee members agreed that herbicide treatments for FWL, YFI and PL were not completely effective in 2008 due to the late start (cool spring) and other wet weather delays. • GPS shape files locating properties giving rights of entry were provided to the contractor. This method proved to be a much better way to identify properties to be treated, and ensured that all targeted plants were properly sprayed with herbicide. • The Department of Ecology approved that SWM staff time hours spent toward LMD development in 2008 and 2009 may be submitted for grant reimbursement. 9.2 2009 Aquatic Vegetation Management Recommendations The following outlines recommendations for 2009: • Continue implementing annual Work Plan, including conducting annual surveys and controlling noxious plants when documented. • Continue moving forward with LMD formation. Grant funds should only be enough to carry the aquatic weed management efforts through 2009. • Continue to stress open, frequent, and accurate communication with the contractor. • Continue to solicit contractor oversight assistance and follow-up observations from lake residents so that issues concerning poor treatment effectiveness can be addressed in a timely manner. • Conduct a more aggressive outreach to the property owners with purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris who have not granted access to treat. • Hold a Plant ID Workshop every two years instead of annually. 21 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT 9.3 2008 Public Education Summary A wide variety of Public Education products were offered and distributed in 2008. In addition to the quarterly newsletter, the LMD distributed Washington Department of Health Toxic Blue Green Algae brochure, milfoil boater education brochures, good plant/bad plant flyers, Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese flyers, and a Be a Lake Steward flyer and press release. The lake steward flyer and press release describe everyday practices lake residents can adopt to help improve aquatic weed control and water quality of the lake. 9.4 2009 Public Education Recommendations • Continue aggressive public education effort targeting all lake properties identified as being infested with noxious weeds in order to prevent their spread. • Implement more efficient volunteer timesheet recordkeeping and submittal procedure. • Because there were problems with lake residents submitting volunteer hours in a timely fashion, a better system needs to be implemented in order for Grant Payment Request to be submitted to Ecology on time on a bi-annual basis. 9.5 2008 Ecology Grant Budget Summary North Lake completed the fourth year of the Ecology AWMF Grant. At the end of 2008, $9,558 was left out of the initial $60,000 grant. Based on the expected annual expenditures for aquatic plant management, it is likely that all grant funds will be used after the 2009 season. 9.6 2008 Algae Summary SWM staff were well prepared in 2008 to alert lake residents to possible blue-green algae blooms. SWM staff will continued to follow development of the evolving Department of Ecology algae program throughout 2008 to keep informed concerning funding options, sampling protocols, and the development of new public health standards. 22 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2008 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE Aquatic Weed Management Program 2009 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Author: Dan Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................................1 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................................................1 2.2 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM....................................................................................................................2 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT......................................................................................3 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT....................................................................................4 5.0 2009 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES..........................................................................4 5.1 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-NOXIOUS PLANTS....................................................................................................4 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily.................................................................................................................................5 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris.......................................................................................................................................5 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife....................................................................................................................................5 5.1.4 Narrow leaf cattail...................................................................................................................................6 5.2 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS..............................................................................................................................6 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment...............................................................................................................7 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris&Purple Loosestrife Treatment...................................................................................7 5.2.3 Narrow Leaf Cattail Treatment...............................................................................................................8 5.3 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL...................................................................................................................8 5.4 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL....................................................................................................................8 5.5 WEED RAKES................................................................................................................................................8 5.6 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-NATIVE PLANTS......................................................................................................9 5.7 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT.........................................................................................................10 5.8 ALGAE........................................................................................................................................................10 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................................................................11 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT...............................................................................................11 7.1 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT.......................................................................................................................12 7.1.1 North Lake Steering Committee(NLSC)...............................................................................................12 7.1.2 Development of 2009 Work Plan..........................................................................................................13 7.1.3 Plant ID Workshop...............................................................................................................................13 7.1.4 Boater Education..................................................................................................................................14 7.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION....................................................................................................................................14 7.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter.............................................................................................................................14 7.2.2 Public Notices.......................................................................................................................................14 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs...............................................................................................................14 7.2.4 Web Page Development........................................................................................................................15 7.2.5 Annual Report........................................................................................................................................15 8.0 2009 BUDGET REVIEW............................................................................................................................15 8.1 TASKS 1 &2 BUDGET,PROJECT ADMINISTRATION/VEGETATION MANAGEMENT......................................15 8.2 TASK 3 PUBLIC EDUCATION........................................................................................................................16 8.3 ECOLOGY GRANT BUDGET REVIEw............................................................................................................16 9.0 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT.........................................................................17 10.0 2009 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2010..........................................18 10.1 2009 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SUMMARY.............................................................................19 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT 10.2 2010 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................19 10.3 2009 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY..........................................................................................................19 10.4 2010 PUBLIC EDUCATION RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................20 10.5 2009 ECOLOGY GRANT BUDGET SUMMARY...............................................................................................20 10.6 2009 ALGAE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................................20 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2009 North Lake Budget Overview....................................15 Table 2. 2009 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2................................16 Table 3. 2009 North Lake Budget, Task 3........................................16 Table 4. North Lake Grant Running Balance...................................17 Table 5. LIVID Assessment Rates .................................................. 18 THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON SWM WEB PAGE (http://www.citvoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?paqe=713) North Lake Grant Agreement 2006 DOE Aquatic Plant & Algae NPDES Permit AquaTechnex North Lake 2009 Year End Report 2009 North Lake YFI & PL Right of Entry Parcel Map NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by all North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC)members and the lake community who contributed to the successful 2009 aquatic plant management program. The Committee includes the following members: • Lake residents: Wendy Honey (Chairperson), Chuck Gibson (Co-Chair), Julie Cleary, Debra Hansen, Barry James, and James Chastain • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Jerry heinz • City of Federal Way: Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Hollie Shilley(ESA&NPDES Coordinator) In addition, Surface Water Management (SWM) staff wishes to thank the City Council and City Manager for their collective support of our aquatic weed management efforts. We also recognize Kathy Hamel, Department of Ecology (Ecology), for her continuing aquatic plant management advice and encouragement. NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2009, the aquatic vegetation management actions and public education goals outlined in the North Lake 2009 Work Plan were successfully implemented. Noxious aquatic plants —fragrant water lily,purple loosestrife,yellow flag iris and narrow leaf cattail—were targeted for control at as low a density as was environmentally and economically feasible, and at levels that did not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. In addition, an effective public education program was conducted that helped to prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants and non-native animal species to the lake. This program also aided in the early detection of aquatic weed re-infestations by continuing to involve the North Lake community in the aquatic plant management process. North Lake remains well within the WDFW and Ecology criteria for a minimum of 35% native vegetation littoral zone coverage to support good fish habitat. This annual report summarizes the steps taken by North Lake during 2009 to conform to the aquatic weed management program established in the 2004 Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP)—a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed eradication efforts in North Lake. In addition, all activities undertaken were within the scope of work authorized by the five-year Department of Ecology (Ecology)Aquatic Weeds Management Fund(AWMF)grant 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development An Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP)is a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed control efforts. In 2004, the North Lake community coordinated with the King County Lake Stewardship group to develop an IAVMP. In addition to laying the groundwork for future aquatic weed work, an up- to-date IAVMP was required by Ecology to be submitted prior to seeking future grant funding from the State. With assistance from King County, the lake community began developing an IAVMP. During this period, efforts began to prepare an AWMF grant application. A series of meetings were held throughout the summer of 2004 to gather public comment and to finalize the IAVMP. Anticipating future annexation by the City of Federal Way, Surface Water Management staff began participating in the process. The IAVMP was submitted on September 16, 2004, and Ecology issued final approval for the plan on October 8. With an approved IAVMP, application was made to Ecology for an AWMF grant. 1 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT Early in 2005, the North Lake community officially became incorporated into the City of Federal Way. As a result, an AWMF grant was awarded to the city that included a multi-year effort to fully eradicate the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The action plan included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education. The grant budget totaled approximately $80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The Grant Agreement was scheduled to expire on December 31, 2009. The Scope of Work is broken out into the following four tasks: Task 1 —Project Administration/Management Task 2—Vegetation Management Task 3 —Public Education Task 4—Reporting Task 1 (Project Administration/Management) involves the maintenance of project records; submittal of payment vouchers, fiscal forms and project reports; compliance with procurement and contracting requirements; attainment of all permits, licenses, easements of property rights; and submittal of all required performance items. Task 2 (Vegetation Management) and Task 3 (Public Education) are action items specifically required by this agreement, and are outlined and described in the 2009 North Lake Work Plan. Task 4 (Reporting) involves the preparation of a final report summarizing the actions taken during the entire period of the Grant Agreement. 2.2 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, tend to be invasive, and pose a serious threat to our State's waterbodies, such as North Lake, if left unchecked. Because nonnative plants have few natural controls in their new habitat, they spread rapidly, out-competing and effectively destroying native plant and animal habitats. This can lead to a degradation of recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties (Ecology, 2005). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur, and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major classes (A, B and C) are listed according to the seriousness of the threat they pose to the state, or a region of the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. 2 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a County option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. The joint efforts undertaken by the North Lake Steering Committee, lake residents, and SWM staff are described in this year-end report. The document also outlines the work completed to eradicate the following three noxious weed species detected in 2009: Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Fragrant water lily Nymphaea odorata C Yellow flag iris Iris pseudacorus C Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria B In addition to the weeds listed above, Narrow leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) was positively identified as populating a single property near the north end of the lake in 2007. Although the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board has not classified this noxious weed,Narrow leaf cattail is currently on the noxious weed monitor list because it has caused considerable problems in the Midwest, and can hybridize with native cattail to form an even more invasive strain. Due to these factors, Ecology approved the addition of this noxious plant to the North Lake Grant Agreement scope of work. It was targeted for herbicide treatment in 2007, 2008, and 2009. 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT On March 31, 2006, an application for coverage under the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit(permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae in North Lake was submitted. The permit combined and replaced portions of the Aquatic Noxious Weed Control General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and the Aquatic Nuisance Weed and Algae Control General NPDES Permit that was issued prior to 2006. The permit (#WAG-994094) was issued to the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex on June 2, 2006. It governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The five-year permit expires on April 1, 2011. Ecology's new permit is issued under the authority of RCW 90.48. Such issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. 3 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT Ecology decided to issue a permit that is based solely on state authority to regulate the discharge of waste materials into waters of the state. 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT In 2009, AquaTechnex, Inc. operated under the last year of a two-year Professional Services Agreement (contract) with the City of Federal Way. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides), post control surveys,reports as required, and attending meetings as required. 5.0 2009 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 5.1 Systematic Survey— Noxious Plants AquaTechnex completed the initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake on June 17, and followed up with a second survey on September 18. For each effort, the survey team mapped all submerged, floating and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. In addition to making visual inspections, the survey team collected a number of rake samples at various GPS points. These points were collected to define each treatment area through diver communication to the mapping vessel team. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2009 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page). Native plant information may be found in Section 5.6. Although colonies of Eurasian watermilfoil (milfoil)were distributed throughout the littoral area in the northern and central part of North Lake in 2005, no milfoil has been detected since. The 2005 herbicide treatment with 2,4-D appeared to be successful in completely eradicating this State of Washington Class B Weed from North Lake. Noxious weeds found during the 2009 North Lake initial systematic survey included: • Fragrant water lily(Nymphaea odroata) • Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) • Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) • Narrow leaf cattail(Typha angustifolia) 4 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT The following is a discussion regarding the noxious weeds found during the 2009 plant survey. 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant waterlily(FWL)is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins, and can be recognized by the fragrant white,pink to purple,many-petaled flowers that float on the water surface. Their large, round, floating leaves have a distinctive slit on one side. Due to its attractiveness, this nonnative plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has been introduced to many lakes in Washington, but can be invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas (Ecology 2006). The June 17 survey located sparse FWL growth in North Lake, and as with prior years, the colonies were noted in selected areas along the shoreline perimeter. The population densities of FWL were reported to be declining in response to treatments, and nearly eliminated in developed shoreline areas. Based on the survey results, AquaTechnex recommended targeting this species with the aquatic herbicide glyphosate (Rodeo) as necessary for complete eradication. 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable with its showy yellow flowers colorfully displayed along the edge of water and in wetlands. The flowers occur in late spring or early summer. The noxious aquatic plant(State of Washington Class C Weed), including flower stalk, will grow up to nearly five feet tall. The rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude native wetland species (WA State Noxious Weed Control Board). The initial survey found YFI populating the shoreline perimeter in selected locations, primarily where permission to treat was not provided by the land owners. Identical to the control plan implemented during the last three seasons, glyphosate (Rodeo) would be utilized for YFI treatments. Glyphosate provides effective long-term control, with applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide into the root system. 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This erect, robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class C Weed(Ecology, 2006). The noxious emergent plant was reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake. Because an aquatic plant survey only provides a snapshot of the conditions present in the lake at the time of the inspection, it was expected that additional PL seedlings would emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines later in the growing season. Identical to YFI treatment, the proposed control action for PL would involve herbicide application on private property. Therefore, permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required(see Section 5.2.2). 5 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT 5.1.4 Narrow leaf cattail Narrow leaf cattail is a herbaceous, rhizomatous, perennial plant with long, slender, green stalks topped with brown, fluffy, sausage-shaped flowering heads. It spreads both vegetatively and by seed, particularly under drawdown conditions, and is generally found in deeper water than native cattail. Narrow leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) is a non-native aquatic weed currently on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board "monitor list". This plant has not been classified yet based on the species stage of invasion, but the Board is monitoring the situation to determine if it warrants addition to the Noxious Weed list. Although the previous year's herbicide treatment nearly eradicated the entire stand of this noxious weed, the 2009 initial survey found a small amount of re-growth in the singular colony populating a small section of shoreline at the northwest corner of the lake. 5.2 Herbicide Treatments The herbicide treatment program was designed to meet the requirements of both the Ecology Grant Agreement and NPDES permit. Within this framework, Year Two Integrated Treatment Plan benchmarks were followed where practical. The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities into water bodies that are contiguous with rivers, creeks, and lakes; or into navigable waters. The applicator also must comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (Rodeo) was used to treat FWL, YFI, PL and narrow leaf cattail on North Lake in 2009. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) for aquatic applications. The active ingredient in glyphosate moves through the plant from the point of foliage contact into the root system. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days, seven days on more on most perennial weeds, and thirty days or more on most woody plants. It is known that extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects include gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which will advance to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: 6 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT • The product is a systemic herbicide effective in removing targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication pursuant to the requirements outlined in the Ecology Grant Agreement. The plan was designed to achieve the following: • Gradually replace FWL with native vegetation over time to preserve and improve fish habitat. • Improve boater access and provide safer recreation opportunities, • Reduce the possibility of excessive amounts of dying vegetation that could contribute to increased nutrient loading(resulting in algae blooms). • Reduce the likelihood that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would place a demand on dissolved oxygen, thereby stressing aquatic life. The AquaTechnex 2009 North Lake Year End Report (found on the SWM website) contains maps with locations of FWL colonies. Glyphosate (Rodeo), a liquid, was applied directly on the Illy pads by a two-person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied (by licensed applicators) uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication to areas that did not uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated equaled less than one acre. The first glyphosate application of FWL was conducted on the morning of July 31. A second and final application occurred August 28. 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris & Purple Loosestrife Treatment Following the requirements outlined in the Grant Agreement, eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2009. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of the emergent weeds. Maps showing YSI and PL colony locations and all lake parcels granting access for treatment may be found on the SWM website. YFI and PL colonies were treated on July 31, follow-up spot treatment occurred on August 28. The YFI and PL-treated areas in 2009 totaled less than one acre. During treatment, AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate (Rodeo). The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex was careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses. For PL, spraying individual plant was deemed the most effective application method (versus wicking) given the issues of work efficiency and accessibility. The 7 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators) in the same fashion as that for FWL. 5.2.3 Narrow Leaf Cattail Treatment The single stand of this invasive aquatic weed was treated on July 31 with glyphosate. Permission (right of entry) from the affected landowner was obtained because the proposed control action would involve herbicide application(glyphosate) on private property. The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied (by licensed applicators) in the same fashion as that for the other targeted noxious species. 5.3 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM staff issued notices to all lake residents regarding proper hand pulling and digging techniques for YFI. For PL, hand removal methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks)were offered as effective options, including proper disposal of all organic debris(roots, seed heads and stems). 5.4 Water Lily Island Control Water lily islands have decreased considerably since 2005, particularly at the south end of the lake. As a result, lake access has improved tremendously following the volunteer efforts beginning in 2006 that eventually permanently opened and deepened water access for a number of lake residents. The NLSC agreed that floating FWL island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. No corrective action was taken in 2009. 5.5 Weed Rakes The weed rake loan program continued in 2009, providing North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain the beneficial uses of the shoreline for fishing,boating and swimming. Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline (not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the "FW Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet. Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes depending on the type of plant targeted: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. 8 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT Because milfoil was not detected during the initial survey, weed rakes were loaned out immediately to lake residents to control native aquatic plants. The program was shut down for the season on September 15 pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 5.6 Systematic Survey— Native Plants The objective of the systematic surveys is to quantify the vegetation present and to provide a continued baseline of the condition of the lake plant communities. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2009 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page). In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 5.0, the native plant species documented in 2009 included: FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Yellow pond lily Nuphar spp. Native Spatterdock Nuphar polysepalum Native SUBMERSED PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Muskgrass Chara sp. Native Naiad Na/as sp. Native White stemmed pondweed Potamogeton praelongus Native American elodea Elodea Canadensis Native Emergent Plants Emergent plant populations were expected to be identical to those documented in 2008. Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species, Typha spp. (Cattail), Eleocharis sp. (Spike Rush), and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush), that grow in the shallow margins of a lake. The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals. Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese. All of North Lake's emergent vegetation provides habitat for amphibians and fish and help to stabilize shorelines. Floating Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and provides spawning habitat for fish. Nuphar polysepalum (Spatterdock) is a perennial waterlily-like plant that forms extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. When mature, Spatterdock has large elephant-ear- shaped leaves and yellow flowers. Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that dominates the lake bottom. Unlike most other perennial aquatic plants, it reproduces from seed each year. The aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring, produces seeds that drop them to the lake sediments. Over time, a 9 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. Other submerged plant species in the lake included Potamogeton praelongus (White stemmed pondweed). This native member of the pondweed family occurs in small clumps and was observed throughout the deeper littoral lake zones. Because of its depth, this plants did not appear to be impacting beneficial uses of the lake. The native aquatic plant Elodea acts as an under story or secondary plant in the lake, and can expand to the point of causing major problems. The absence of complaints from lake residents concerning this species indicate that beneficial uses were not impacted. Chara (Muskgrass) is a macro algae and is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. Native plant species in North Lake are extremely healthy. Natives are once again becoming dominant and stands are very diverse. Najas communities in the shallows of the north end often reach the surface and reduce the accessibility of this area from the rest of the lake. Elsewhere in the lake it was noted by some residents that the native plants are becoming an issue—both from a safety/comfort aspect and by reducing the ease at which residents are able to access and enjoy the lake. This has been primarily restricted to those living in shallower portions of the lake. Although there are some dense stands of pondweeds appearing in deeper water they are not causing any beneficial use issues at this time. As such, North Lake remains well within the WDFW and Ecology criteria for a minimum of 35% native vegetation littoral zone coverage to support good fish habitat. 5.7 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on September 18, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the glyphosate herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2009 on the four targeted species (FWL, PL, YFI and narrow leaf cattail). All treated plants showed clear symptoms of herbicide damage, with peak effectiveness due to the warm dry weather. Remaining stands of YFI and PL were primarily located at properties where permission to enter was not secured. Some stands of PL adjacent to the Weyerhaeuser property remained intact due to low summertime lake water levels which made access to these shoreline plants difficult. Plans will be implemented in 2010 to utilize a shallow pond boat for more efficient treatment in these areas. 5.8 Algae Cyanobacteria are common in freshwater lakes, frequently forming dense populations or water blooms in eutrophic (nutrient rich)waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are light, temperature,pH, and nutrient concentrations. 10 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT Because of the potential that the blooms may occur, SWM staff issues annual algae information, and algae alerts when present, to all North Lake residents. The alerts caution residents and users of the presence of toxic-producing algae and recommends safe action to prevent exposure. In addition, the information concerning the Department of Ecology Algae Control Program is provided — a program that focuses on providing local governments with the tools they need to manage algae problems. A total of$250,000 is earmarked each year to target blue-green algae due to the health risks posed to humans,pets, and livestock. No algae blooms were reported in 2009. 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING During the first two years of the Ecology Grant Agreement (2005 and 2006), SWM Water Quality personnel collected herbicide samples from North Lake in the water column before and after treatment (2,4-D and glyphosate in 2005, and glyphosate only in 2006). The sampling effort was required by the Grant Agreement, and was undertaken to determine lake concentrations of herbicides, and to provide an analytical measurement of the contractor's performance. Background samples (before treatment) and post treatment samples were collected at time intervals prescribed in the Grant Agreement. Samples were taken in the middle of the lake (outside the treatment areas), and inside an individual treatment site and analyzed for the targeted herbicides. The sampling results obtained during the first two years of monitoring detected very low concentrations. Additionally, there was limited persistence of the herbicides in the water column after initial application. For these reasons, sampling per the Grant Agreement was waived by Ecology in 2007, 2008 and 2009. 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The elements of the Education and Public Involvement Program for North Lake are based primarily on the Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). The Ecology Grant Agreement incorporates the information in the IAVMP, forming two primary components for Education and Public Involvement. The two components focus on prevention and detection of noxious aquatic and emergent weeds, and lake stewardship. The North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) oversees the implementation of the Ecology Grant Agreement, which is outlined in the 2009 North Lake Work Plan. 11 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT 7.1 Community Involvement North Lake Community Involvement program for 2009 involved the following: 7.1.1 North Lake Steering Committee (NLSC) The NLSC is charged with setting the aquatic plant management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. The NLSC is comprised of North Lake residents, Weyerhaeuser representatives and City of Federal Way staff. The Committee meets quarterly, or more often as necessary to implement Work Plan goals. The following members comprise the NLSC: Lake Residents Wendy Honey—(Chair) Debra Hansen Chuck Gibson—(Vice Chair) Barry James Julie Cleary James Chastain Weyerhaeuser Representative Jerry Heinz City of Federal Way Dan Smith, SWM Don Robinett, SWM Hollie Shilley, SWM The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities of the NLSC: • Reviews annual plant survey information. • Develops an annual aquatic plant management Work Plan based upon the information revealed in the annual plant surveys. The Work Plan prioritizes aquatic weed problem areas, identifies preferred control methods for each species, and develops the anticipated budget. • Assists the City of Federal Way with oversight of control work to keep contractors accountable. • Participates in preparation of an annual evaluation report that summarizes plant control activities, lake-user's perspectives on the plant community, and recommendations for the next year's control strategy. • Assists with presentation of aquatic plant management efforts to lake residents at an annual community meeting and Plant ID Workshop. • Helps the City of Federal Way to ensure that all lake residents receive proper notification pursuant to the requirements of the Aquatic Plant&Algae NPDES Permit. • Participates in other annual community involvement/education strategies and plant control efforts as needed. The NLSC met two times in 2009. The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. The following are brief abstracts from each NLSC meeting: July 14,2009 12 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT • Review of LMD status • Review of 2009 survey and Work Plan. • Discussion concerning treatment options for native vegetation. • Grant budget status. • AquaTechnex contract. • Right of entry procedures. • Week rake program. • Blue-green algae program. November 18,2009 • Grant status. • LMD status • Contract amendment(agreement of 2-year extension). • Discussion concerning public education program. • Overview of the 2009 program and discussion of bathymetry mapping with AquaTechnex staff. 7.1.2 Development of 2009 Work Plan The goals and budget regarding the 2009 Work Plan were based primarily upon two elements: the 2004 IAVMP and the specific requirements prescribed by the Ecology Grant Agreement. The following is a brief outline of the 2009 Work Plan: Task 1: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted invasive aquatic weeds (milfoil, fragrant water Illy, purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris, and narrow leaf cattail), and other problematic aquatic plant issues (i.e. mud island removal) for the year. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 5.0. Task 2: Public Education describes all public education elements to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of invasive aquatic weeds. Items included in Task 2 include: community meetings (spring) and Plant ID Workshop (summer); quarterly newsletter (The Lake View); boater outreach program; printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases;web site development; and development of an annual report. 7.1.3 Plant ID Workshop A joint Steel Lake—North Lake Plant ID Workshop was held on June 20 at Steel Lake Park. This event provided an atmosphere of learning within a social setting. Residents from both lakes were 13 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT presented information describing each aquatic plant management program. They were also able to pose questions to Surface Water Management(SWM) staff and individual NLSC members. North Lake residents were afforded the opportunity to review the 2009 Work Plan and examine maps depicting noxious weed infestation areas and proposed treatment locations. In addition, various public education displays provided hands-on opportunities for individuals to view both native and noxious plants (good and bad) retrieved from their lake. Both SWM staff and lake residents harvested the live plant specimens found in North Lake for the displays. 7.1.4 Boater Education On April 25 (Opening Day of Fishing Season), several Boy Scout volunteers handed out Milfoil Education Brochures to boaters at the North Lake Boat Ramp. The brochure outlines the detrimental effect milfoil has on fresh water lakes, the propagation of the noxious plant, and reminds boaters to properly clean their vessels prior to entering or leaving the boating area. 7.2 Public Education The North Lake Public Education program for 2009 involved the following: 7.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter SWM staff continued issuing the quarterly public education newsletter, The Lake View to all North Lake residents via US Postal Service; and to lake residents and interested parties via an email subscribe list. The newsletter, created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, includes updates to lake residents concerning recent vegetation management activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 7.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via mail and email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. Lake residents were also sent notices prior to all public meetings. During the course of 2009, SWM staff mailed out formal public notices and followed up with supplemental notices to lake residents. In addition, periodic supplemental updates advising lake residents of work plan activities were e-mailed to E-Subscribe participants approximately 24 hours prior to the activity on the lake. 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs SWM staff developed and/or distributed the following lake-related informational flyers and brochures: • Milfoil Boater Education • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program • Be Lake Steward 14 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT 7.2.4 Web Page Development In 2009, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • Current IAVMP (with figures and maps) • 2009 Work Plan • Chronology and description of important 2009 North Lake activities • North Lake publications such as: The Lake View; informative flyers (milfoil,blue-green algae,purple loosestrife, ducks& geese,yellow flag iris, good plants/bad plants); public notices; and NLSC Meeting notes. 7.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a final year-end report for all lake residents and parties of interest that describes the activities and a budget review of the prior year. 8.0 2009 BUDGET REVIEW The 2009 Work Plan budget was calculated based upon the scope of aquatic weed management expected to be accomplished during the year. Table 1 below provides an overview of the final North Lake aquatic plant management budget costs for 2009: Table 1. 2009 North Lake Budget Overview TASK Estimates Actual Expenses Task 1 &2, Project $10,657 $8,625 AdministrationNegetation Management Task 3, Public Education $3,230 $2,629 YEAR END $13,887 $11,254 8.1 Tasks 1 & 2 Budget, Project Administration/ Vegetation Management Table 2 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 1 and 2. Table 2. 2009 North Lake Budget, TASK 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation Mgmt. 15 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT GOAL 2009 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Annual Permit Fee for 2010 coverage) 338 397 Two diver surveys(Spring&Summer 2,170 2,033 Milfoil herbicide treatment 749 0 Fragrant water lily treatment 350 341 YFI, PL and narrow leaf cattail treatment 450 341 Diver removal of milfoil 590 0 Advance resident notifications&postings 690 709 Native weed manual removal 1,330 0 Water lily island control 0 0 Post control visual inspection 740 755 Contractor attendance at meetings 900 126 Contractor final report 0 0 Grant eligible SWM staff time 2,350 3,918 TOTALS 10,657 8,625 Note: The 2009 Weed Permit Fee($397.00)was not a grant eligible expense. 8.2 Task 3 Public Education Table 3 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 3. Table 3. 2009 North Lake Budget, TASK 3 Public Education GOAL 2009 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Meeting refreshments 50 26 Quarterly newsletter 500 290 Annual evaluation report 150 0 Annual Spring Community Meeting 0 0 Plant ID workshop/cookout 300 0 Public education printing 150 66 Boater outreach program 0 0 City LIVID web page 0 0 Grant-eligible SWM staff wages and benefits 2,350 2,147 TOTALS 3,230 2,629 8.3 Ecology Grant Budget Review Table 4 below summarizes the running balance of the Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund grant for North Lake, set to expire December 31, 2009: 16 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT Table 4. North Lake Grant Running Balance Year Grant Funds Used Running Balance Start N/A $60,158 2005 $18,882 $41,276 2006 $14,849 $26,427 2007 $11,246 $15,181 2008 $5,623 $9,558 2009 $9,532 $18 9.0 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT In mid 2007, SWM staff began preparing the NLSC for the development of a Lake Management District(LMD). With the expectation that grant funding would be exhausted by the end of 2009, it was stressed during a series of committee meetings that the process for LMD formation should begin near the end of 2008 in order to provide a funding source for continuous aquatic plant management. The NLSC benefited by participating in joint-meetings with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, learning that utility formation takes months of public process. During the May 8, 2008 meeting, SWM staff requested that a formal letter from lake residents be issued to the City Manager which expresses their interest in forming a LMD for North Lake. A letter signed by sixteen lake residents was received by Public Works on August 25, 2008. Soon after, SWM staff began assembling information concerning other Washington State LMDs. From this information, several assessment rate structure options were developed that reflected the various zoning types and quantity of parcels surrounding the lake. This information was presented to the NLSC on October 8, 2008 and the committee agreed upon a scope, annual cost, boundary, and duration for the district. On February 24, 2009, a public meeting for the residents of North Lake was held to discuss LMD development. The meeting was well received with no opposition to the proposed plan. A petition to the City Council was signed by sixteen property owners affected by the LMD, including Weyerhaeuser Co. By this action, the petition met the requirement set forth in RCW 36.61.030 (signed by ten landowners or owners of at least fifteen percent of the acreage contained within the proposed LMD) and enabled the Council to take action regarding the formation of a North Lake LMD. See North Lake LMD Assessment Rates, Table 5. 17 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT On June 2, 2009, City Council held a public hearing on the formation of the North Lake LMD. The public hearing was favorable. A resolution calling for a vote on the formation of the North Lake LMD was approved by Council on June 16, 2009 and the vote was completed on July 10`h 2009. A simple majority of the voters approved the creation of the North Lake LMD (97% of the ballots cast voted yes), and the proposed ordinance creating Lake Management District Number Two for North Lake. The LMD for North Lake will become effective early in 2010. Table 5. North Lake LMD Assessment Rates Assessment Category Rate Revenue ($) Single Family Residential (RS9.6), Lakefront property Developed property(53 units) X$100.00 per unit $5,300 Vacant property(168 ft) X$0.70 per lakefront foot $118 Single Family Residential (RS9.6), Non-lakefront property with deeded lake access Developed property(1 unit) X$75.00 per unit $75 Vacant property(1 unit) X$15.00 per unit $15 Weyerhaeuser(RS9.6) Vacant property(82 ft) X$0.70 per lakefront foot $ 57 Weyerhaeuser(CP-1) Commercial property(3,714 ft) X$0.80 per lakefront foot $2,971 WDFW Public Boat Launch Single annual assessment $4,000 TOTAL ANNUAL ASSESSMENT $12,536 City of Federal Way Zoning Designations: Office Zone CP-1 Corporate Park-1 Single Family Residential RS9.6(1 unit/9,600 square feet) 10.0 2009 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2010 The following discussion summarizes the 2009 North Lake program, and outlines recommendations for 2010: 18 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT 10.1 2009 Aquatic Vegetation Management Summary The NLSC agreed that the aquatic vegetation management actions included in the 2009 Work Plan were fully implemented. Plants approved for control under the Ecology grant (FWL, PL, YFI, and Narrow leaf cattail)—continued to betargeted. North Lake has been free and clear of milfoil since 2005. As a result, chemical herbicides have not been applied. This has resulted in reduced control costs and less ecological impacts. GPS shape files for those properties providing rights of entry were supplied to the contractor prior to treatment activities. The method again proved to very effective in ensuring that all targeted emergent plants were properly sprayed with herbicide. FWL is almost completely eradicated. Herbicide treatments for YFI and PL continued to be successful where applied, but the work has been limited because rights of entry permission have not been submitted by all property owners. Additionally, PL colonies continue to survive along parts of Weyerhaeuser's shoreline due to poor access when lake levels are low. 10.2 2010 Aquatic Vegetation Management Recommendations The following outlines recommendations for 2010: • All Aquatic Plant Management activities will be implemented through North Lake LMD Number Two. • The annual Work Plan will continue to be implemented, including conducting annual surveys, controlling noxious plants when documented, preparing bathymetry mapping, and beginning a water quality monitoring program. • Conduct a thorough evaluation of native plant densities after the initial survey to identify properties with impacted beneficial uses. • Continue to stress open, frequent, and accurate communication with the contractor. • Continue to solicit contractor oversight assistance and follow-up observations from lake residents so that issues concerning poor treatment effectiveness can be addressed in a timely manner. • Conduct a more aggressive outreach to the property owners with purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris who have not granted access to treat. • Properly identify and effectively treat PL on Weyerhaeuser property shoreline. 10.3 2009 Public Education Summary A wide variety of Public Education products were offered and distributed in 2009. In addition to the quarterly newsletter, the LMD distributed Washington Department of Health Toxic Blue Green Algae brochure, milfoil boater education brochures, good plant/bad plant flyers, Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese flyers, and a Be a Lake Steward flyer and press release. The lake steward flyer and press release describe everyday practices lake residents can adopt to help improve aquatic weed control and water quality of the lake. 19 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT Additionally, the Public Education program was used to efficiently and effectively inform lake residents concerning the LMD process throughout 2009 by means of Lake View articles, e- subscribe,public hearings, and committee meetings. 10.4 2010 Public Education Recommendations • Continue aggressive public education effort targeting all lake properties infested with noxious weeds in order to prevent their spread. • Improve property owner right of entry participation. 10.5 2009 Ecology Grant Budget Summary North Lake completed the fifth year of the five-year Ecology AWMF Grant. At the end of 2009, $18 remained in the initial $60,000 grant fund. The final year of the grant was especially successful in funding the LMD formation process. 10.6 2009 Algae Summary SWM staff were well prepared in 2009 to alert lake residents to possible blue-green algae blooms. SWM staff will continued to follow development of the evolving Department of Ecology algae program throughout 2009 to keep informed concerning funding options, sampling protocols, and the development of new public health standards. 20 NORTH LAKE AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2009 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE Management District 2010 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Author: Dan Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................1 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT....................................................................................................................2 2.3 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM....................................................................................................................2 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT.....................................................................................3 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT...................................................................................3 5.0 2010 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES.........................................................................4 5.1 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-Noxious PLANTS...................................................................................................4 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily................................................................................................................................4 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris.......................................................................................................................................4 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife...................................................................................................................................5 5.2 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS.............................................................................................................................5 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment..............................................................................................................6 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris&Purple Loosestrife Treatment.................................................................................. 7 5.3 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL..................................................................................................................7 5.4 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL....................................................................................................................8 5.5 WEED RAKES...............................................................................................................................................8 5.6 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-NATIVE PLANTS.....................................................................................................8 5.7 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT........................................................................................................ 10 5.8 ALGAE........................................................................................................................................................ 10 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................................................................11 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT...............................................................................................12 7.1 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT...................................................................................................................... 12 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee(NLAA)............................................................................................. 12 7.1.2 Development of 2010 Work Plan......................................................................................................... 14 7.1.3 Plant ID Workshop............................................................................................................................... 14 7.1.4 Boater Education................................................................................................................................. 14 7.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION.................................................................................................................................... 14 7.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter............................................................................................................................ 14 7.2.2 Public Notices...................................................................................................................................... 15 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs.............................................................................................................. 15 7.2.4 Web Page Development....................................................................................................................... 15 7.2.5 Annual Report....................................................................................................................................... 15 8.0 2010 BUDGET REVIEW...........................................................................................................................16 8.1 TASKS 1 &2 BUDGET,PROJECT ADMINISTRATION/VEGETATION MANAGEMENT...................................... 16 8.2 TASK 3 PUBLIC EDUCATION....................................................................................................................... 17 8.3 TASK 4 WATER QUALITY MONITORING...................................................................................................... 17 8.4 TASK 5 SWM STAFF TIME REIMBURSEMENT............................................................................................. 17 9.0 2010 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2011.........................................18 9.1 2010 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SUMMARY............................................................................ 18 9.2 2011 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................ 18 9.3 2010 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY......................................................................................................... 19 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 9.4 2011 PUBLIC EDUCATION RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................... 19 9.5 2010 ALGAE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................. 19 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2010 water Quality Monitoring Results...............................11 Table 2. 2010 North Lake Budget Overview....................................16 Table 3. 2010 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2................................16 Table 4. 2010 North Lake Budget, Task 3........................................17 Table 5. 2010 North Lake Budget, Task 4........................................17 Table 6. 2010 North Lake Budget, Task 5........................................17 THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON SWM WEB PAGE ( http://www.cityoffederalway.com/Page.aspx?page=711 ) 2006 DOE Aquatic Plant & Algae NPDES Permit AquaTechnex North Lake 2010 Year End Report NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by the North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) members and the entire lake community who contributed to the successful development of the North Lake Management District and the implementation of the 2010 aquatic plant management program. The Committee includes the following members: • Lake residents: Chuck Gibson (Chair), Wendy Honey (Co-Chair), Terry Thomas, Robin Cook, and Jack Rosenow • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Jerry Heinz • City of Federal Way: Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Hollie Shilley(ESA&NPDES Coordinator) In addition, Surface Water Management (SWM) staff wishes to thank the City Council and City Manager for their collective support of our aquatic weed management efforts. We also recognize Kathy Hamel, Department of Ecology (Ecology), for her continuing aquatic plant management advice and encouragement. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2010, the aquatic vegetation management actions and public education goals outlined in the North Lake Management District (LMD) 2010 Work Plan were successfully implemented. Noxious aquatic plants —fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris and narrow leaf cattail —were targeted for control at as low a density as was environmentally and economically feasible, and at levels that did not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. In addition, an effective public education program was conducted that helped to prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants and non-native animal species to the lake. This program also aided in the early detection of aquatic weed re-infestations by continuing to involve the North Lake community in the aquatic plant management process. North Lake remains well within the WDFW and Ecology criteria for a minimum of 35% native vegetation littoral zone coverage to support good fish habitat. This annual report summarizes the steps taken by the LMD during 2010 to conform to Ordinance No. 09-622 that created Lake Management District Number 2 for North Lake. These efforts are based upon the aquatic weed management program established in the 2004 Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP) developed for North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development An Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP)is a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed control efforts. In 2004, the North Lake community coordinated with the King County Lake Stewardship group to develop an IAVMP. In addition to laying the groundwork for future aquatic weed work, an up- to-date IAVMP was required by Ecology to be submitted prior to seeking future grant funding from the State. With assistance from King County, the lake community began developing an IAVMP. During this period, efforts began to prepare an AWMF grant application. A series of meetings were held throughout the summer of 2004 to gather public comment and to finalize the IAVMP. Anticipating future annexation by the City of Federal Way, Surface Water Management staff began participating in the process. The IAVMP was submitted on September 16, 2004, and Ecology issued final approval for the plan on October 8. With an approved IAVMP, application was made to Ecology for an AWMF grant. Early in 2005, the North Lake community officially became incorporated into the City of Federal Way. As a result, an AWMF grant was awarded to the city that included a multi-year effort to 1 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT fully eradicate the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The action plan included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education. The grant budget totaled approximately $80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The AWMP grant expired December 31, 2009. 2.2 Lake Management District In 2009, city staff and residents collaborated to form Lake Management District (LMD)Number Two for North Lake. The ten-year LMD (initiated in 2010), built upon the IAVMP, was developed to generate revenue for ongoing management of aquatic vegetation, water quality education and related projects in North Lake. The district was also designed to improve the quality of life in and around North Lake for years to come with the following end result: a healthy water body that benefits lake residents, lake users, and the entire city. 2.3 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, tend to be invasive, and pose a serious threat to our State's waterbodies, such as North Lake, if left unchecked. Because nonnative plants have few natural controls in their new habitat, they spread rapidly, out-competing and effectively destroying native plant and animal habitats. This can lead to a degradation of recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties (Ecology, 2005). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur, and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major classes (A, B and C) are listed according to the seriousness of the threat they pose to the state, or a region of the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a County option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. 2 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT The joint efforts undertaken by the North Lake Advisory Committee, lake residents, and SWM staff are described in this year-end report. The document also outlines the work completed to eradicate the following three noxious weed species detected in 2010: Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Fragrant water lily Nymphaea odorata C Yellow flag iris Iris pseudacorus C Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria B 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT On March 31, 2006, an application for coverage under the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit(permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae in North Lake was submitted. The permit combined and replaced portions of the Aquatic Noxious Weed Control General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and the Aquatic Nuisance Weed and Algae Control General NPDES Permit that was issued prior to 2006. The permit (#WAG-994094) was issued to the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex on June 2, 2006. It governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The five-year permit expires on April 1, 2011. Ecology's new permit is issued under the authority of RCW 90.48. Such issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Ecology decided to issue a permit that is based solely on state authority to regulate the discharge of waste materials into waters of the state. 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT In 2010, AquaTechnex, Inc. operated under the first year of a two-year Amended Professional Services Agreement (contract) with the City of Federal Way. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides),post control surveys,reports as required, and attending meetings as required. 3 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 5.0 2010 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 5.1 Systematic Survey— Noxious Plants AquaTechnex completed the initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake on June 14 and 15, and followed up with a second survey on September 24. For each effort, the survey team mapped all submerged, floating and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. In addition to making visual inspections, the survey team collected a number of rake samples at various GPS points. These points were collected to define each treatment area through diver communication to the mapping vessel team. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2010 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page). Native plant information may be found in Section 5.6. Noxious weeds found during the 2010 North Lake initial systematic survey included: • Fragrant water lily(Nymphaea odroata) • Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) • Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) The following is a discussion regarding the noxious weeds found during the 2010 plant survey. 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant waterlily(FWL)is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins, and can be recognized by the fragrant white,pink to purple,many-petaled flowers that float on the water surface. Their large, round, floating leaves have a distinctive slit on one side. Due to its attractiveness, this nonnative plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has been introduced to many lakes in Washington, but can be invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas (Ecology 2006). The June surveys located sparse FWL growth in North Lake, and as with prior years, the colonies were noted in selected areas along the shoreline perimeter. The population densities of FWL were reported to be declining in response to treatments, and nearly eliminated in developed shoreline areas. Based on the survey results, AquaTechnex recommended targeting this species with the aquatic herbicide glyphosate (Rodeo) as necessary for complete eradication. 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable with its showy yellow flowers colorfully displayed along the edge of water and in wetlands. The flowers occur in late spring or early summer. The noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed), including flower stalk, 4 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT will grow up to nearly five feet tall. The rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude native wetland species (WA State Noxious Weed Control Board). The initial survey found YFI populating the shoreline perimeter in selected locations, primarily where permission to treat was not provided by the land owners. Identical to the control plan implemented during the last three seasons, glyphosate (Rodeo) would be utilized for YFI treatments. Glyphosate provides effective long-term control, with applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide into the root system. 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This erect, robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class C Weed(Ecology, 2006). The noxious emergent plant was reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake. Because an aquatic plant survey only provides a snapshot of the conditions present in the lake at the time of the inspection, it was expected that additional PL seedlings would emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines later in the growing season. The proposed control action for PL involved herbicide application of Triclopyr (Renovate3) on private property. Therefore, permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required(see Section 5.2.2). 5.2 Herbicide Treatments The herbicide treatment program was designed to meet the requirements of both the Ecology Grant Agreement and NPDES permit. Within this framework, Year Two Integrated Treatment Plan benchmarks were followed where practical. The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities into water bodies that are contiguous with rivers, creeks, and lakes; or into navigable waters. The applicator also must comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (Rodeo) was used to treat FWL and YFI colonies on North Lake in 2010. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) for aquatic applications. The active ingredient in glyphosate moves through the plant from the point of foliage contact into the root system. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days, seven days on more on most perennial weeds, and thirty days or more on most woody plants. 5 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT It is known that extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects include gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which will advance to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a systemic herbicide effective in removing targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. Triclopyr A trade name for Triclopyr is Renovate3. The product is registered for use in aquatic or riparian environments, and is applied as a liquid. It is a relatively fast-acting, systemic, selective herbicide used for the control of broad-leaved species such as purple loosestrife. Triclopyr is very useful for purple loosestrife control since native grasses and sedges are unaffected by this herbicide. 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication pursuant to the requirements outlined in the Ecology Grant Agreement. The plan was designed to achieve the following: • Gradually replace FWL with native vegetation over time to preserve and improve fish habitat. • Improve boater access and provide safer recreation opportunities, • Reduce the possibility of excessive amounts of dying vegetation that could contribute to increased nutrient loading(resulting in algae blooms). • Reduce the likelihood that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would place a demand on dissolved oxygen, thereby stressing aquatic life. The AquaTechnex 2010 North Lake Year End Report (found on the SWM website) contains maps with locations of FWL colonies. Glyphosate (Rodeo), a liquid, was applied directly on the Illy pads by a two-person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. Two separate treatments took place in 2010. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators)uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication to areas that did not uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated equaled less than one acre. 6 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris & Purple Loosestrife Treatment Continued eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2010. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of the emergent weeds. Maps showing YSI and PL colony locations and all lake parcels granting access for treatment may be found on the SWM website. Two separate treatments were performed on YFI colonies in 2010. During treatment, AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate (Rodeo). The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex was careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators)in the same fashion as that for FWL. In June, SWM began coordinating with King County Noxious Weed Control Program personnel in purple loosestrife identification and control. On July 13, KC conducted a PL canoe survey of the entire North Lake shoreline. Colony locations in both GPS listed by address were compared to properties providing right of entry, and were forwarded to AquaTechnex to be used for upcoming herbicide treatments. For PL, spraying individual plant with Triclopyr was deemed the most effective application method (versus wicking)given the issues of work efficiency and accessibility. As with YFI, the noxious PL weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. Again, AquaTechnex was careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses. King County provided a follow up PL survey on August 9 after the first treatment, and noted many surviving plants on the Weyerheuser side (undeveloped shoreline). Pursuant to this observation, AquaTechnex returned on August 11 to conduct a more thorough shoreline inspection and selective treatment of all detected PL plants. 5.3 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM staff issued notices to all lake residents regarding proper hand pulling and digging techniques for YFI. For PL, hand removal methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks)were offered as effective options, including proper disposal of all organic debris (roots, seed heads and stems). Additionally, King County Noxious Weed Control Program personnel individually hand dug several PL plants found on properties during their survey when the plant was found to be at or near seed-producing stage in order to prevent spread. 7 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 5.4 Water Lily Island Control Water lily islands have decreased considerably since 2005, particularly at the south end of the lake. As a result, lake access has improved tremendously following the volunteer efforts beginning in 2006 that eventually permanently opened and deepened water access for a number of lake residents. The NLSC agreed that floating FWL island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. No corrective action was taken in 2010. 5.5 Weed Rakes The weed rake loan program continued in 2010, providing North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain the beneficial uses of the shoreline for fishing,boating and swimming. Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline (not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the WDFW Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet. Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes depending on the type of plant targeted: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. Because milfoil was not detected during the initial survey, weed rakes were loaned out immediately to lake residents to control native aquatic plants. The program was shut down for the season on September 15 pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 5.6 Systematic Survey— Native Plants The objective of the systematic surveys is to quantify the vegetation present and to provide a continued baseline of the condition of the lake plant communities. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex 2010 North Lake Year End Report, (located on SWM web page). In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 5.0, the native plant species documented in 2010 included: FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Yellow pond lily Nuphar spp. Native Spatterdock Nuphar polysepalum Native 8 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT SUBMERSED PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Muskgrass Chara sp. Native Naiad Najas sp. Native White stemmed pondweed Potamogeton praelongus Native American elodea Elodea Canadensis Native Emergent Plants Emergent plant populations were expected to be identical to those documented in 2009. Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species, Typha spp. (Cattail), Eleocharis sp. (Spike Rush), and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush), that grow in the shallow margins of a lake. The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals. Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese. All of North Lake's emergent vegetation provides habitat for amphibians and fish and help to stabilize shorelines. Floating Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and provides spawning habitat for fish. Nuphar polysepalum (Spatterdock) is a perennial waterlily-like plant that forms extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. When mature, Spatterdock has large elephant-ear- shaped leaves and yellow flowers. Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that dominates the lake bottom. Unlike most other perennial aquatic plants, it reproduces from seed each year. The aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring, produces seeds that drop them to the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. Other submerged plant species in the lake included Potamogeton praelongus (White stemmed pondweed). This native member of the pondweed family occurs in small clumps and was observed throughout the deeper littoral lake zones. Because of its depth, this plants did not appear to be impacting beneficial uses of the lake. The native aquatic plant Elodea acts as an under story or secondary plant in the lake, and can expand to the point of causing major problems. The absence of complaints from lake residents concerning this species indicate that beneficial uses were not impacted. Chara (Muskgrass) is a macro algae and is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. 9 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT Due to the cool summer weather, the native plant species in North Lake were reported to be less dense than in prior years. As such, North Lake remains well within the WDFW and Ecology criteria for a minimum of 35% native vegetation littoral zone coverage to support good fish habitat. A small colony of a new sedge-like emergent plant was noted on North Lake in 2010. The location is along the undeveloped Weyerhaeuser shoreline near the southern end of the lake. Although the species was not provided by AquaTechnex, it will be targeted for identification in 2011. 5.7 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on September 24, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2010 on the three targeted species (FWL, PL, and YFI) . All treated plants showed clear symptoms of herbicide damage, with peak effectiveness due to the warm dry weather. Remaining stands of YFI and PL were primarily located at properties where permission to enter was not secured. Both SWM personnel and Chuck Gibson also performed walks inside and along the Weyerhaeuser property shoreline in early October. A few stands of PL were noted in areas where access from the lakeside would be difficult. Plans will be implemented in 2011 for more efficient inspection and treatment in these areas by the contractor, especially the more remote and hard to access locations. 5.8 Algae Cyanobacteria are common in freshwater lakes, frequently forming dense populations or water blooms in eutrophic (nutrient rich)waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are light, temperature,pH, and nutrient concentrations. Because of the potential that the blooms may occur, SWM staff issues annual algae information, and algae alerts when present, to all North Lake residents. The alerts caution residents and users of the presence of toxic-producing algae and recommends safe action to prevent exposure. In addition, the information concerning the Department of Ecology Algae Control Program is provided — a program that focuses on providing local governments with the tools they need to manage algae problems. A total of$250,000 is earmarked each year to target blue-green algae due to the health risks posed to humans,pets, and livestock. SWM responded to three separate reports of algae in 2010,but none included cyanobacteria. All three reports indicate blooms of filamentous green algae, a non-toxic and usually non- problematic freshwater species. 10 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING The North Lake LMD implemented a water quality monitoring program in 2010. The intent was to duplicate previous data produced by the King County Lake Stewardship program (last completed in 2004), and to determine the Trophic State Index. Water quality samples for dissolved nitrogen, nitrate plus nitrite, and dissolved phosphate were collected from the surface, one meter depth, and bottom, 7 to 8 meter depth in June, July and August. The concentrations of dissolved nitrogen, nitrate plus nitrite, ranged from 0.022 mg/l to non-detect. The surface sample in June was the only sample with detectable dissolved nitrogen. Dissolved phosphate was only detected in the June bottom sample, 0.1 mg/1. All other samples were non-detect. The lack of available phosphate indicates that phytoplankton, e.g., algal blooms, is limited by the lack of available dissolved phosphate. Previous testing by King County was conducted with a method that measures total nitrogen and phosphate which includes quantities bound in particulate material. Therefore the results for 2010 cannot be directly compared to the previous water quality testing. For 2011 an attempt will be made to find a laboratory that will conduct total nitrogen and phosphate testing. Temperature and Secchi disk reading were collected with the nutrient water samples. Results are listed in the table below. Table 1, 2010 Water Quality Monitoring Results Sample Date/Depth N (mg/L) p(mg/L) Secchi (m) Temperature Nitriate+Nitrite (F) June 1,2010,surface 0.022 ND 62 2.50 June 1,2010, bottom ND 0.1 54 July 7,2010,surface ND ND 72 2.5 July 7,2010, bottom ND ND NS August 24,2010,surface ND ND 72 2.75 August 24,2020, bottom ND ND 56 September 25,2020,surface NS NS 64 4.00 September 25,2020, bottom NS NS 57 Previous Year's ranges for Total N 0.008—0.025 0.37-0.95 N/A N/A and Total P" Total sample digestion by King County Method that includes biological material. ND=Non Detect NS=No Sample 11 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The elements of the Education and Public Involvement Program for North Lake are based primarily on the Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). The annual Work Plan incorporates the information in the IAVMP, forming two primary components for Education and Public Involvement. The two components focus on prevention and detection of noxious aquatic and emergent weeds, and lake stewardship. The North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) oversees the implementation of the 2010 North Lake Work Plan. 7.1 Community Involvement North Lake Community Involvement program for 2010 involved the following: 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAA) The NLAC is charged with setting the aquatic plant management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. Resolution No. 09-560, passed by the City Council, created the Advisory Committee for North Lake LMD Number 2. The purpose of the NLAC is to provide for LMD property owner representation to the City Council. Per Resolution No. 09-560,NLAC representation consists of. Five (5) representing single family and/or vacant properties; one (1) representing Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (public boat launch property); and one (1) representing the Weyerhaeuser Corporation. Per Resolution No. 09-560, an open recruitment process for selection to the NLAC took place during December 2009 and January 2010. Resulting from this process, the following individuals were selected for the NLAC: • Chuck Gibson, lake resident(Chair) • Wendy Honey, lake resident(Co-Chair) • Terry Thomas, lake resident • Robin Cook, lake resident • Jack Rosenow, lake resident • Jerry Heinz, Weyerhaeuser • Kye Iris, WDFW Kye Iris represents WDFW. Because of potential conflicts of interest, WDFW has chosen not to be a voting member of the committee,but have indicated that they are available for comment if particular concerns arise (such as a public access issue). 12 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities of the NLAC: • Reviews annual plant survey information. • Develops an annual aquatic plant management Work Plan based upon the information revealed in the annual plant surveys. The Work Plan prioritizes aquatic weed problem areas, identifies preferred control methods for each species, and develops the anticipated budget. • Assists the City of Federal Way with oversight of control work to keep contractors accountable. • Participates in preparation of an annual evaluation report that summarizes plant control activities, lake-user's perspectives on the plant community, and recommendations for the next year's control strategy. • Assists with presentation of aquatic plant management efforts to lake residents at an annual community meeting and Plant ID Workshop. • Helps the City of Federal Way to ensure that all lake residents receive proper notification pursuant to the requirements of the Aquatic Plant&Algae NPDES Permit. • Participates in other annual community involvement/education strategies and plant control efforts as needed. The NLAC met three times in 2010. An attempt was made late in the year to hold a meeting in December,but individual schedules prevented a successful forth annual meeting. The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. The following are brief abstracts from each NLAC meeting: March 29,2010 • Election of Chair and Co-Chair • Review of LMD formation • Review of 2010 proposed Work Plan, and approval • Discussion concerning bathymetry mapping(not enough funds in 20 10) • Overview of 2010 Public Education program June 24,2010 • Budget summary • Initial survey results (no milfoil) • Treatment schedule • Right of entry procedures • Public education program review to date September 29,2010 • Budget summary • AquaTechnex personnel provide review of the 2010 aquatic plant management program • Discussion of the 2010 purple loosestrife control program • Review of water quality data 13 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 7.1.2 Development of 2010 Work Plan The goals and budget regarding the 2010 Work Plan are based upon Resolution Number 09-544 to form North Lake Management District Number 2. The following is a brief outline of the 2010 Work Plan: Task 1 & 2: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted invasive aquatic weeds (milfoil, fragrant water Illy, purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris, and narrow leaf cattail), and other problematic aquatic plant issues (i.e. mud island removal) for the year. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 5.0. Task 3: Public Education describes all public education elements to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of invasive aquatic weeds. Items included in Task 2 include: community meetings (spring) and Plant fD Workshop (summer); quarterly newsletter (The Lake View); boater outreach program; printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases;web site development; and development of an annual report. Task 3: Water Quality Monitoring describes sampling for nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P); and the monitoring of depth and clarity. 7.1.3 Plant ID Workshop The joint Steel Lake—North Lake Plant ID Workshop was not held in 2010 due to the every- other-year format adopted by each lake committee. The next event will be in 2011. 7.1.4 Boater Education On April 24 (Opening Day of Fishing Season), volunteers from the NLAC handed out Milfoil Education Brochures to boaters at the North Lake Boat Ramp. The brochure outlines the detrimental effect milfoil has on fresh water lakes, the propagation of the noxious plant, and reminds boaters to properly clean their vessels prior to entering or leaving the boating area. 7.2 Public Education The North Lake Public Education program for 2010 involved the following: 7.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter SWM staff continued issuing the quarterly public education newsletter, The Lake View to all North Lake residents via US Postal Service; and to lake residents and interested parties via an email subscribe list. The newsletter, created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, includes updates to lake residents concerning recent vegetation management activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 14 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 7.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via mail and email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. Lake residents were also sent notices prior to all public meetings. During the course of 2010, SWM staff mailed out formal public notices and followed up with supplemental notices to lake residents. In addition, periodic supplemental updates advising lake residents of work plan activities were e-mailed to E-Subscribe participants approximately 24 hours prior to the activity on the lake. 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs SWM staff developed and/or distributed the following lake-related informational flyers and brochures: • Milfoil Boater Education • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program • Be Lake Steward 7.2.4 Web Page Development In 2010, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • Current IAVMP (with figures and maps) • 2010 Work Plan • Chronology and description of important 2010 North Lake activities • North Lake publications such as: The Lake View; informative flyers (milfoil,blue-green algae,purple loosestrife, ducks&geese,yellow flag iris, good plants/bad plants);public notices; and NLAC Meeting notes. 7.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a final year-end report for all lake residents and parties of interest that describes the activities and a budget review of the prior year. 15 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 8.0 2010 BUDGET REVIEW The 2010 Work Plan budget was calculated based upon the scope of aquatic weed management expected to be accomplished during the year. Table 1 below provides an overview of the final North Lake aquatic plant management budget costs for 2010: Table 2. 2010 North Lake Budget Overview TASK Estimates Year End (includes taxes) (includes taxes) LMD Annual Assessment $12,536 $11,529 Task 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation Management ( )$7,330 (-)$5,713 Task 3, Public Education (-)$550 (-)$562 Task 4,Water Quality Monitoring (-)$1,655 (-)$390 Task 5, SWM Staff Time Reimbursement (-)$2,600 (-)$2,584 King County Department of Assessments Collection Fee ( )$400 0 YEAR END BALANCE 0 $2,280 The year end balance includes delinquent accounts ($928), King County public LIVID advertisement per RCW ($89), and interest income. 8.1 Tasks 1 & 2 Budget, Project Administration/Vegetation Management Table 2 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 1 and 2. Table 3. 2010 North Lake Budget, TASK 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation Mgmt. GOAL 2010 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Annual Permit Fee for 2011 coverage) $397 $414 Two diver surveys(Spring&Summer $2,038 $2,180 Milfoil herbicide treatment $750 0 Fragrant water lily treatment $350 $463 YFI, PL and narrow leaf cattail treatment $350 $928 Diver removal of milfoil $590 0 Advance resident notifications&postings $710 $759 Native weed manual removal $890 0 Water lily island control 0 0 Post control visual inspection $755 $805 Contractor attendance at meetings $500 $164 Contractor final report 0 0 TOTALS $7,330 $5,713 16 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 8.2 Task 3 Public Education Table 3 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 3. Table 4. 2010 North Lake Budget, TASK 3 Public Education GOAL 2010 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Meeting refreshments $50 $25 Quarterly newsletter $400 $375 Annual evaluation report 0 0 Annual Spring Community Me ting 0 0 Plant ID workshop/cookout 0 0 Public education printing $100 $59 Boater outreach program 0 0 City LVID web page 0 0 Postage 0 $103 TOTALS $550 $562 8.3 Task 4 Water Quality Monitoring Table 4 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 4. Table 5. 2010 North Lake Budget, TASK 4 Water Quality Monitoring GOAL 2010 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Annual North Lake water quality monitoring $1,655 $390 TOTALS $1,655 $390 8.4 Task 5 SWM Staff Time Reimbursement Table 5 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 5. Table 6. 2010 North Lake Budget, TASK 5 SWM Staff Time Reimbursement GOAL 2010 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) SWM staff wages and benefits $2,600 $2,584 TOTALS 1 $2,600 1 $2,584 17 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 9.0 2010 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2011 The following discussion summarizes the 2010 North Lake program, and outlines recommendations for 2011: 9.1 2010 Aquatic Vegetation Management Summary The NLAC agreed that the aquatic vegetation management actions included in the 2009 Work Plan were fully implemented. Plants approved for control under the Ecology grant (FWL, PL, and YFI)—continued to be targeted. North Lake has been free and clear of milfoil since 2005. As a result, chemical herbicides have not been applied. This has resulted in reduced control costs and less ecological impacts. GPS shape files for those properties providing rights of entry were supplied to the contractor prior to treatment activities. The method again proved to very effective in ensuring that all targeted emergent plants were properly sprayed with herbicide. FWL is almost completely eradicated. Herbicide treatments for YFI and PL continued to be successful where applied, but some of the work has been limited because rights of entry permission have not been submitted by all property owners. Additionally, PL colonies continue to survive along parts of Weyerhaeuser's shoreline due to poor access when lake levels are low. 9.2 2011 Aquatic Vegetation Management Recommendations The following outlines recommendations for 2011: • All Aquatic Plant Management activities will be implemented through North Lake LMD Number Two. • The annual Work Plan will continue to be implemented, including conducting annual surveys, controlling noxious plants when documented, and water quality monitoring. • Conduct a thorough evaluation of native plant densities after the initial survey to identify properties with impacted beneficial uses. • Determine if sufficient funds are available to conduct bathymetry mapping. • Continue to stress open, frequent, and accurate communication with the contractor. • Continue to solicit contractor oversight assistance and follow-up observations from lake residents so that issues concerning poor treatment effectiveness can be addressed in a timely manner. • Continue to contact property owners with purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris who have not granted access to treat. • Conduct more aggressive identification and treatment of PL on Weyerhaeuser property shoreline, and continue to follow up during periods of peak bloom in order to detect colonies. • Collect appropriate water quality monitoring data to effectively calculate Trophic State Index(TSI). 18 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT 9.3 2010 Public Education Summary A wide variety of Public Education products were offered and distributed in 2010. In addition to the quarterly newsletter, the LMD distributed Washington Department of Health Toxic Blue Green Algae brochure, milfoil boater education brochures, good plant/bad plant flyers, Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese flyers, and a Be a Lake Steward flyer and press release. The lake steward flyer and press release describe everyday practices lake residents can adopt to help improve aquatic weed control and water quality of the lake. Additionally, the Public Education program was used to efficiently and effectively inform lake residents concerning the LMD process throughout 2010 by means of Lake View articles, e- subscribe,public hearings, and committee meetings. 9.4 2011 Public Education Recommendations • Continue aggressive public education effort targeting all lake properties infested with noxious weeds in order to prevent their spread. • Improve property owner right of entry participation. • Conduct semi-annual Plant ID Workshop in the summer. 9.5 2010 Algae Summary SWM staff were well prepared in 2010 to alert lake residents to possible blue-green algae blooms. SWM staff will continued to follow development of the evolving Department of Ecology algae program throughout 2010 to keep informed concerning funding options, sampling protocols, and the development of new public health standards. 19 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2010 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE Management District 2011 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Author: Dan Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................1 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT....................................................................................................................2 2.3 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM....................................................................................................................2 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT.....................................................................................3 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT...................................................................................3 5.0 2011 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES.........................................................................4 5.1 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-Noxious PLANTS...................................................................................................4 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily................................................................................................................................4 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris.......................................................................................................................................4 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife...................................................................................................................................5 5.1.4 Narrow leaf cattail..................................................................................................................................5 5.2 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS.............................................................................................................................5 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment..............................................................................................................6 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris&Purple Loosestrife Treatment.................................................................................. 7 5.2.3 Narrow Leaf Cattail Treatment.............................................................................................................. 7 5.3 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL..................................................................................................................7 5.4 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL....................................................................................................................8 5.5 WEED RAKES...............................................................................................................................................8 5.6 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-NATIVE PLANTS.....................................................................................................8 5.7 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT........................................................................................................ 10 5.8 ALGAE........................................................................................................................................................ 10 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................................................................11 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT...............................................................................................13 7.1 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT...................................................................................................................... 13 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee(NLAA)............................................................................................. 13 7.1.2 Development of 2011 Work Plan......................................................................................................... 15 7.1.3 Plant ID Workshop............................................................................................................................... 15 7.1.4 Boater Education................................................................................................................................. 15 7.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION.................................................................................................................................... 15 7.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter............................................................................................................................ 15 7.2.2 Public Notices...................................................................................................................................... 16 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs.............................................................................................................. 16 7.2.4 Web Page Development....................................................................................................................... 16 7.2.5 Annual Report....................................................................................................................................... 16 8.0 2011 BUDGET REVIEW...........................................................................................................................17 8.1 TASKS 1 &2 BUDGET,PROJECT ADMINISTRATION/VEGETATION MANAGEMENT...................................... 17 8.2 TASK 3 PUBLIC EDUCATION....................................................................................................................... 18 8.3 TASK 4 WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM..................................................................................... 18 8.4 TASK 5 SWM STAFF TIME REIMBURSEMENT............................................................................................. 18 9.0 2011 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2011.........................................19 9.1 2011 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SUMMARY............................................................................ 19 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT 9.2 2012 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................ 19 9.3 2011 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY.........................................................................................................20 9.4 2012 PUBLIC EDUCATION RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................................................20 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2011 Nutrient Water Quality Results..................................11 Table 2. 2011 North Lake Budget Overview....................................16 Table 3. 2011 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2................................16 Table 4. 2011 North Lake Budget, Task 3........................................17 Table 5. 2011 North Lake Budget, Task 4........................................17 Table 6. 2011 North Lake Budget, Task 5........................................17 Figure 1. North Lake Temperature, 2011..........................................11 Figure 2. North Lake DO, 2011........................................................12 MORE NORTH LAKE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON SWM WEB PAGE http://www.cityoffederalway.com/index.aspx?nid=185 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by the North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) members and the entire lake community who contributed to the successful development of the North Lake Management District and the implementation of the 2011 aquatic plant management program. The Committee includes the following members: • Lake residents: Chuck Gibson (Chair), Wendy Honey (Co-Chair), Terry Thomas, Robin Cook, and Jack Rosenow • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Jerry Heinz • City of Federal Way: Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Hollie Shilley(ESA&NPDES Coordinator) In addition, Surface Water Management (SWM) staff wishes to thank the City Council and City Manager for their collective support of our aquatic weed management efforts. We also recognize Kathy Hamel, Department of Ecology (Ecology), for her continuing aquatic plant management advice and encouragement. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2011, the aquatic vegetation management actions and public education goals outlined in the North Lake Management District (LMD) 2011 Work Plan were successfully implemented. Noxious aquatic plants —fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris and narrow leaf cattail —were targeted for control at as low a density as was environmentally and economically feasible, and at levels that did not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. In addition, an effective public education program was conducted that helped to prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants and non-native animal species to the lake. This program also aided in the early detection of aquatic weed re-infestations by continuing to involve the North Lake community in the aquatic plant management process. North Lake remains well within the WDFW and Ecology criteria for a minimum of 35% native vegetation littoral zone coverage to support good fish habitat. This annual report summarizes the steps taken by the LMD during 2011 to conform to Ordinance No. 09-622 that created Lake Management District Number 2 for North Lake. These efforts are based upon the aquatic weed management program established in the 2004 Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP) developed for North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development An Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP)is a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed control efforts. In 2004, the North Lake community coordinated with the King County Lake Stewardship group to develop an IAVMP. In addition to laying the groundwork for future aquatic weed work, an up- to-date IAVMP was required by Ecology to be submitted prior to seeking future grant funding from the State. With assistance from King County, the lake community began developing an IAVMP. During this period, efforts began to prepare an AWMF grant application. A series of meetings were held throughout the summer of 2004 to gather public comment and to finalize the IAVMP. Anticipating future annexation by the City of Federal Way, Surface Water Management staff began participating in the process. The IAVMP was submitted on September 16, 2004, and Ecology issued final approval for the plan on October 8. With an approved IAVMP, application was made to Ecology for an AWMF grant. Early in 2005, the North Lake community officially became incorporated into the City of Federal Way. As a result, an AWMF grant was awarded to the city that included a multi-year effort to 1 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT fully eradicate the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The action plan included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education. The grant budget totaled approximately $80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The AWMP grant expired December 31, 2009. 2.2 Lake Management District In 2009, city staff and residents collaborated to form Lake Management District (LMD)Number Two for North Lake. The ten-year LMD (initiated in 2010), built upon the IAVMP, was developed to generate revenue for ongoing management of aquatic vegetation, water quality education and related projects in North Lake. The district was also designed to improve the quality of life in and around North Lake for years to come with the following end result: a healthy water body that benefits lake residents, lake users, and the entire city. 2.3 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, are invasive and pose a serious threat to our State's waterbodies, such as North Lake, if left unchecked. Because nonnative plants have few natural controls in their new habitat, they spread rapidly, out-competing and effectively destroying native plant and animal habitats. This can lead to a degradation of recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties (Ecology, 2005). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur, and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major classes (A, B and C) are listed according to the seriousness of the threat they pose to the state, or a region of the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a County option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. 2 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT The joint efforts undertaken by the North Lake Advisory Committee, lake residents, and SWM staff are described in this year-end report. The document also outlines the work completed to eradicate the following three noxious weed species detected in 2011: Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Fragrant water lily Nymphaea odorata C Yellow flag iris Iris pseudacorus C Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria B In addition to the weeds listed above, Narrow leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) was positively identified as populating a single location near the northwest end of the lake immediately south of the public boat launch. Although the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board has not classified this noxious weed, Narrow leaf cattail is currently on the noxious weed monitor list because it has caused considerable problems in the Midwest, and can hybridize with native cattail to form an even more invasive strain. 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT In 2011, coverage under the state of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit (permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae in Steel Lake was authorized. The NPDES permit was issued to the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex with an effective date of March 18, 2011. The permit governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications,residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The five-year permit expires on March 18, 2016 and is issued under the authority of RCW 90.48. Such issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Ecology decided to issue a permit that is based solely on state authority to regulate the discharge of waste materials into waters of the state. 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT In 2011, AquaTechnex, Inc. operated the last year of a two-year Amended Professional Services Agreement (contract) with the City of Federal Way. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides), post control surveys,reports as required, and attending meetings as required. 3 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT 5.0 2011 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 5.1 Systematic Survey— Noxious Plants AquaTechnex completed the initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake on June 23 and 24, and followed up with a second survey on September 24. For each effort, the survey team mapped all submerged, floating and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. In addition to making visual inspections, the survey team collected a number of rake samples at various GPS points. These points were collected to define each treatment area through diver communication to the mapping vessel team. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex North Lake: Report of Activities 2011, (located on SWM web page).Native plant information may be found in Section 5.6. Noxious weeds found during the 2011 North Lake initial systematic surveys included: • Fragrant water lily(Nymphaea odroata) • Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) • Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) The following is a discussion regarding the noxious weeds found during the 2011 plant survey. 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant waterlily(FWL)is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins, and can be recognized by the fragrant white,pink to purple,many-petaled flowers that float on the water surface. Their large, round, floating leaves have a distinctive slit on one side. Due to its attractiveness, this nonnative plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has been introduced to many lakes in Washington, but can be invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas (Ecology 2006). The June surveys located sparse FWL growth in North Lake, and as with prior years, the colonies were noted in selected areas along the shoreline perimeter. The population densities of FWL were reported to be declining in response to treatments, and nearly eliminated in developed shoreline areas. Based on the survey results, AquaTechnex recommended targeting this species with the aquatic herbicide glyphosate (Rodeo) as necessary for complete eradication. 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable with its showy yellow flowers colorfully displayed along the edge of water and in wetlands. The flowers occur in late spring or early summer. The noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed), including flower stalk, 4 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT will grow up to nearly five feet tall. The rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude native wetland species (WA State Noxious Weed Control Board). The initial survey found YFI populating the shoreline perimeter in selected locations, primarily where permission to treat was not provided by the land owners. Identical to the control plan implemented during the last three seasons, glyphosate (Rodeo) would be utilized for YFI treatments. Glyphosate provides effective long-term control, with applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide into the root system. 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This erect, robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class C Weed(Ecology, 2006). The noxious emergent plant was reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake. Because an aquatic plant survey only provides a snapshot of the conditions present in the lake at the time of the inspection, it was expected that additional PL seedlings would emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines later in the growing season. The proposed control action for PL involved herbicide application of Triclopyr (Renovate3) on private property. Therefore, permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required(see Section 5.2.2). 5.1.4 Narrow leaf cattail Narrow leaf cattail is a herbaceous, rhizomatous, perennial plant with long, slender, green stalks topped with brown, fluffy, sausage-shaped flowering heads. It spreads both vegetatively and by seed, particularly under drawdown conditions, and is generally found in deeper water than native cattail. Narrow leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) is a non-native aquatic weed currently on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board "monitor list". This plant has not been classified yet based on the species stage of invasion, but the Board is monitoring the situation to determine if it warrants addition to the Noxious Weed list. Although previous year's herbicide treatments eradicated this noxious weed from a single location on the lake's northeast shore, the 2011 survey found a small amount of new growth now populating a small section of shoreline at the northwest corner of the lake. 5.2 Herbicide Treatments The herbicide treatment program was designed to meet the requirements of both the Ecology Grant Agreement and NPDES permit. Within this framework, Year Two Integrated Treatment Plan benchmarks were followed where practical. 5 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities into water bodies that are contiguous with rivers, creeks, and lakes; or into navigable waters. The applicator also must comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (Rodeo) was used to treat FWL and YFI colonies on North Lake in 2011. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) for aquatic applications. The active ingredient in glyphosate moves through the plant from the point of foliage contact into the root system. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days, seven days on more on most perennial weeds, and thirty days or more on most woody plants. It is known that extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects include gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which will advance to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a systemic herbicide effective in removing targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication pursuant to the requirements outlined in the Ecology Grant Agreement. The plan was designed to achieve the following: • Gradually replace FWL with native vegetation over time to preserve and improve fish habitat. • Improve boater access and provide safer recreation opportunities, • Reduce the possibility of excessive amounts of dying vegetation that could contribute to increased nutrient loading(resulting in algae blooms). • Reduce the likelihood that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would place a demand on dissolved oxygen, thereby stressing aquatic life. The AquaTechnex 2011 North Lake Year End Report (found on the SWM website) contains maps with locations of FWL colonies. Glyphosate (Rodeo), a liquid, was applied directly on the Illy pads by a two-person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. Two separate treatments took place in 2011. 6 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators)uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication to areas that did not uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated equaled less than one acre. 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris & Purple Loosestrife Treatment Continued eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2011. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of the emergent weeds. Maps showing YSI and PL colony locations and all lake parcels granting access for treatment may be found on the SWM website. During treatment, AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate (Rodeo). The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex was careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators)in the same fashion as that for FWL. SWM continued coordinating with King County Noxious Weed Control Program personnel in purple loosestrife identification and control. KC-conducted PL canoe surveys (GPS coordinates) were provided to AquaTechnex. The contractor used this information to conduct more thorough shoreline inspections and follow-up selective treatment. 5.2.3 Narrow Leaf Cattail Treatment The single stand of Narrow leaf cattail south of the public boat launch was treated with glyphosate. The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied (by licensed applicators)in the same fashion as that for the other targeted noxious species. 5.3 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM staff issued notices to all lake residents regarding proper hand pulling and digging techniques for YFI. For PL, hand removal methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks)were offered as effective options, including proper disposal of all organic debris (roots, seed heads and stems). 7 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT 5.4 Water Lily Island Control Water lily islands have decreased considerably since 2005, particularly at the south end of the lake. As a result, lake access has improved tremendously following the volunteer efforts beginning in 2006 that eventually permanently opened and deepened water access for a number of lake residents. The NLSC agreed that floating FWL island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. No corrective action was taken in 2011. 5.5 Weed Rakes The weed rake loan program continued in 2011, providing North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain the beneficial uses of the shoreline for fishing,boating and swimming. Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline (not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the WDFW Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet. Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes depending on the type of plant targeted: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. Because milfoil was not detected during the initial survey, weed rakes were loaned out immediately to lake residents to control native aquatic plants. The program was shut down for the season on September 15 pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 5.6 Systematic Survey— Native Plants The objective of the systematic surveys is to quantify the vegetation present and to provide a continued baseline of the condition of the lake plant communities. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex North Lake: Report of Activities in 2011, (located on SWM web page). In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 5.0, the native plant species documented in 2011 (unchanged from 2010)included: 8 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Yellow pond lily Nuphar spp. Spatterdock Nuphar polysepalum SUBMERSED PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Muskgrass Chara sp. Naiad Najas sp. White stemmed pondweed Potamogeton praelongus American elodea Elodea Canadensis Emergent Plants Emergent plant populations were expected to be identical to those documented in 2010. Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species, Typha spp. (Cattail), Eleocharis sp. (Spike Rush), and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush), that grow in the shallow margins of a lake. The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals. Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese. All of North Lake's emergent vegetation provides habitat for amphibians and fish and help to stabilize shorelines. Floating Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and provides spawning habitat for fish. Nuphar polysepalum (Spatterdock) is a perennial waterlily-like plant that forms extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. When mature, Spatterdock has large elephant-ear- shaped leaves and yellow flowers. Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that dominates the lake bottom. Unlike most other perennial aquatic plants, it reproduces from seed each year. The aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring, produces seeds that drop them to the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. Other submerged plant species in the lake included Potamogeton praelongus (White stemmed pondweed). This native member of the pondweed family occurs in small clumps and was 9 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT observed throughout the deeper littoral lake zones. Because of its depth, this plants did not appear to be impacting beneficial uses of the lake. The native aquatic plant Elodea acts as an under story or secondary plant in the lake, and can expand to the point of causing major problems. The absence of complaints from lake residents concerning this species indicate that beneficial uses were not impacted. Chara (Muskgrass) is a macro algae and is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. Due to the cool summer weather, the native plant species in North Lake were reported to be less dense than in prior years. As such, North Lake remains well within the WDFW and Ecology criteria for a minimum of 35% native vegetation littoral zone coverage to support good fish habitat. 5.7 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on September 20, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2011 on the four targeted species (F)VL, PL, YFI, and Narrow leaf cattail). Although the treatments were late in the season due to the cool weather, all treated plants showed clear symptoms of herbicide damage. Remaining stands of YFI and PL were primarily located on properties where permission to enter was not secured. 5.8 Algae Cyanobacteria are common in freshwater lakes, frequently forming dense populations or water blooms in eutrophic (nutrient rich)waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are light, temperature,pH, and nutrient concentrations. Because of the potential that the blooms may occur, SWM staff issues annual algae information, and algae alerts when present, to all North Lake residents. The alerts caution residents and users of the presence of toxic-producing algae and recommends safe action to prevent exposure. In addition, the information concerning the Department of Ecology Algae Control Program is provided — a program that focuses on providing local governments with the tools they need to manage algae problems. A total of$250,000 is earmarked each year to target blue-green algae due to the health risks posed to humans,pets, and livestock. No reports of blue-green algae blooms on North Lake were received in 2011. 10 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING Temperature and dissolved oxygen, DO, measurements were taken at one-meter interval in the deepest part of North Lake. The sample location is approximately in the center of the northern part of the lake. Measurements were taken using an YSI ProODO meter. Figure 1 below shows the temperature measurements taken in 2011. Temperature at the surface on April 18, 2011 was 11.7 C (53 F) and 8.0 C (46.4 F) at the bottom. Surface temperature increased gradually to 23.7 C (75 F) on July 5, 2011. It then decreased to 10 C (50 F) on November 8, 2011 the last day in 2011 measurements were taken. On January 1, 2012 the surface temperature was 5.1 C(41 F). Bottom, 7M to 9M, temperatures remained relatively constant throughout the year. On April 18, 2011 it was between 8.6 C and 8.0 C (47 F and 46 F). On January 1, 2012 the temperature was 4.8 C(41 F). Figure 1, North Lake Temperature 2011 30.0 North Lake Temperature 2011 25.0 20.0 �0 M tl M m 15.0 O -t2 M fir-3 10.0 M �-4 M 5.0 0.0 1\10 b\0P 1\1 1\1O 1\11 1\'1 1 1\1 1\11 1\1 410 �\1a�\'Lb �\'L 41 1\1d 'e 1 1 Thermal stratification was noticeable by the end of April, became greatest in July and ended in November when surface temperature became similar to bottom temperature. The water between the surface and three meters tracked closely throughout the year. There was a transition between three meters and six meters. Water between seven meters and the bottom tracked closely. No measurements were collected in December, but by January 1. 2012 the entire water column was close to 5 C (41 F). Five degrees C is close the maximum density temperature for water. Therefore further cooling would decrease the density of the surface water and when the air was cold enough form ice. Dissolved Oxygen, Figure 2 below, concentrations followed the temperature pattern with the top three meters of water have good concentrations throughout the year while the bottom three 11 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT meters dropped as thermal stratification increased through the warmer months. Except for two samplings in September DO concentrations below five meters remained below 4 ppm from the middle of June until the beginning of October. By the last sample on November 8, 2011 DO was relatively constant throughout the water column except for the measurement near the bottom,nine meters. Figure 2, North Lake Dissolved Oxygen 2011 12.0 North Lake DO 2011 10.0 8.0 -0 M 1M E 2M n 6.0 O 3M O -4M 5M 4.0 6 M -7 M -8 M 2.0 9 M 0.0 1\1" 6\V1 1\1 1\1" 41 1° 1\'Y0 19 1\1 0\1 1\11, 1\11 y°\b °\tib °\�° 11\11 11\1 1 1 Table 1 shows the Total Kjeildahl Nitrogen (TKN), Total Phosphorus (TP) and Nitrite plus Nitrate (N+N) concentrations for surface and bottom water samples collected once a month from June through November. The concentration of Total Phosphorus was greater than the laboratory reporting limit of 0.010 mg/l only once in the surface water and 3 times in the bottom water. These concentrations are in the range that was found in the past. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen concentrations were slightly about the reporting limit, 0.050 in the surface water on all occasions except for the August sample. The bottom concentrations ranged from below the reporting limit to 0.715 mg/1. These concentrations are similar to concentrations found in the past. Nitrate plus nitrite concentrations were not measured in the past. The samples collected in the surface ranged from below the reporting level, 0.010 mg/l to a high of 0.10 mg/l. Seven of the 12 samples collected were below reporting concentrations. The data indicate that the nutrient concentrations in North Lake have not changed from concentrations found in the past when King County was conducting sampling in the lake. 12 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT Table 1. North Lake Nutrient Water Quality Data Surface Bottom Date Parameter Concentration Concentration (mg/L) (mg/L) TKN 0.523 0.715 June 6,2011 N+N 0.023 0.10 TP ND 0.043 TKN 0.569 ND July 6,2011 N+N ND 0.087 TP ND ND TKN ND ND August 10, N+N ND ND 2011 TP ND ND TKN 0.536 0.549 September N+N 0.0383 ND 8,2011 TP ND 0.0314 TKN 0.56 0.64 October 13, N+N ND ND 2011 TP 0.053 0.063 TKN .58 0.578 November 8, N+N ND ND 2011 TP ND ND 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The Education and Public Involvement Program for North Lake incorporates elements presented in the 1994 Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). Using the IAVMP, the annual Work Plan includes a Public Education element that has two components: a focus on prevention and detection of noxious aquatic and emergent weeds; and lake stewardship. The North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) oversees the implementation of the 2011 North Lake Work Plan. 7.1 Community Involvement North Lake Community Involvement program for 2011 involved the following: 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAA) The NLAC is charged with setting the aquatic plant management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. Resolution No. 09-560, passed by the City Council, created the Advisory Committee for North Lake LMD Number 2. The purpose of the NLAC is to provide for LMD property owner representation to the City Council. 13 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT Per Resolution No. 09-560,NLAC representation consists of. Five (5) representing single family and/or vacant properties; one (1) representing Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (public boat launch property); and one (1) representing the Weyerhaeuser Corporation. Per Resolution No. 09-560, an open recruitment process for selection to the NLAC took place. Resulting from this process, the following individuals were selected for the NLAC: Member Representing Chuck Gibson Committee Chair,Lake Resident Wendy Honey Committee Co-Chair,Lake Resident Terry Thomas Lake Resident Robin Cook Lake Resident Jack Rosenow Lake Resident Jerry Heinz Weyerhaeuser Kye Iris Washington Department of Fish&Wildlife* Note: because of potential conflicts of interest, WDFW has chosen not to be a voting member of the committee. However, they have indicated that comment will be provided if concerns arise that they are particularly interested in, such as issues with the public access property. The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities of the NLAC: • Reviews annual plant survey information. • Develops an annual aquatic plant management Work Plan based upon the information revealed in the annual plant surveys. The Work Plan prioritizes aquatic weed problem areas, identifies preferred control methods for each species, and develops the anticipated budget. • Assists the City of Federal Way with oversight of control work to keep contractors accountable. • Participates in preparation of an annual evaluation report that summarizes plant control activities, lake-user's perspectives on the plant community, and recommendations for the next year's control strategy. • Assists with presentation of aquatic plant management efforts to lake residents at an annual community meeting and Plant ID Workshop. • Helps the City of Federal Way to ensure that all lake residents receive proper notification pursuant to the requirements of the Aquatic Plant&Algae NPDES Permit. • Participates in other annual community involvement/education strategies and plant control efforts as needed. 14 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT The NLAC met three times in 2011. An attempt was made late in the year to hold a meeting in December,but individual schedules prevented a successful forth annual meeting. The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. The following are brief abstracts from each NLAC meeting: 7.1.2 Development of 2011 Work Plan The goals and budget regarding the 2011 Work Plan are based upon Resolution Number 09-544 to form North Lake Management District Number 2. The following is a brief outline of the 2011 Work Plan: Task 1 & 2: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted invasive aquatic weeds (milfoil, fragrant water Illy, purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris, and narrow leaf cattail), and other problematic aquatic plant issues (i.e. mud island removal) for the year. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 5.0. Task 3: Public Education describes all public education elements to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of invasive aquatic weeds. Items included in Task 2 include: community meetings (spring) and Plant fD Workshop (summer); quarterly newsletter (The Lake View); boater outreach program; printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases;web site development; and development of an annual report. Task 3: Water Quality Monitoring describes sampling for nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P); and the monitoring of depth and clarity. 7.1.3 Plant ID Workshop The joint Steel Lake—North Lake Plant fD Workshop was not held in 2011. 7.1.4 Boater Education On April 24 (Opening Day of Fishing Season), volunteers from the NLAC handed out Milfoil Education Brochures to boaters at the North Lake Boat Ramp. The brochure outlined the detrimental effecst milfoil has on fresh water lakes, the propagation of the noxious plant, and reminds boaters to properly clean their vessels prior to entering or leaving the boating area. 7.2 Public Education The North Lake Public Education program for 2011 involved the following: 7.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter SWM staff continued issuing the quarterly public education newsletter, The Lake View to all North Lake residents via US Postal Service; and to lake residents and interested parties via an 15 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT email subscribe list. The newsletter, created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, includes updates to lake residents concerning recent vegetation management activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 7.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via mail and email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. Lake residents were also sent notices prior to all public meetings. During the course of 2011, SWM staff mailed out formal public notices and followed up with supplemental notices to lake residents. In addition, periodic supplemental updates advising lake residents of work plan activities were e-mailed to E-Subscribe participants approximately 24 hours prior to the activity on the lake. 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs SWM staff developed and/or distributed the following lake-related informational flyers and brochures: • Milfoil Boater Education • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program • Be Lake Steward 7.2.4 Web Page Development In 2011, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • Current IAVMP (with figures and maps) • 2011 Work Plan • Chronology and description of important 2011 North Lake activities • North Lake publications such as: The Lake View; informative flyers (milfoil,blue-green algae,purple loosestrife, ducks&geese,yellow flag iris, good plants/bad plants);public notices; and NLAC Meeting notes. 7.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a final year-end report for all lake residents and parties of interest that describes the activities and a budget review of the prior year. 16 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT 8.0 2011 BUDGET REVIEW The 2011 Work Plan budget was calculated based upon the scope of aquatic weed management expected to be accomplished during the year. Table 1 below provides an overview of the final North Lake aquatic plant management budget costs for 2010: Table 2. 2011 North Lake Budget Overview TASK Estimates Actual Year End (includes taxes) (includes taxes) Balance of 2010 LMD Funds (+)$2,279 $1,955 LMD Annual Assessment (+)$12,536 $11,812 Task 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation (-)$7,853 $5,527 Management Task 3, Public Education (-)$715 $339 Task 4,Water Quality Monitoring (-)$1,655 $2,501 Task 5, SWM Staff Time Reimbursement (-)$2,600 $2,056 King County Department of Assessments Collection Fee ( )$400 $324 YEAR END BALANCE $1,692 $3,020 The year-end balance includes interest income. 8.1 Tasks 1 & 2 Budget, Project Administration/Vegetation Management Table 2 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 1 and 2. Table 3. 2011 North Lake Budget, TASK 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation Mgmt. GOAL 2011 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Annual Permit Fee for 2012 coverage) $415 $433 Two diver surveys(Spring&Summer $2,180 $2,180 Milfoil herbicide treatment $750 0 Purple loosestrife survey 0 $757 Glyphosate herbicide treatment $1,300 $590 Diver removal of milfoil $590 0 Advance resident notifications&postings $759 $759 Native weed manual removal $890 0 Water lily island control 0 0 Post control visual inspection $805 $808 Contractor attendance at meetings $164 0 Contractor final report 0 0 TOTALS $7,853 $5,527 17 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT 8.2 Task 3 Public Education Table 3 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 3. Table 4. 2011 North Lake Budget, TASK 3 Public Education GOAL 2011 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Meeting refreshments $40 $9 Quarterly newsletter $400 $274 Annual evaluation report 0 0 Annual Spring Community Me ting 0 0 Public education printing $75 0 Boater outreach program 0 0 City LVID web page 0 0 Postage $100 $55 TOTALS $615 $338 8.3 Task 4 Water Quality Monitoring Program Table 4 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 4. Table 5. 2011 North Lake Budget, TASK 4 Water Quality Monitoring Program GOAL 2011 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) $1,305(equipment $220(analytical) Develop and implement water quality $250(analytical) monitoring program $171 (analytical) $191 (analytical) $171 (analytical) $191 (analytical) TOTALS $1,655 $2,501 8.4 Task 5 SWM Staff Time Reimbursement Table 5 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 5. Table 6. 2011 North Lake Budget, TASK 5 SWM Staff Time Reimbursement GOAL 2011 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) SWM staff wages and benefits TOTALS $2,600 $2,056 18 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT 9.0 2011 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2011 The following discussion summarizes the 2011 North Lake program, and outlines recommendations for 2012: 9.1 2011 Aquatic Vegetation Management Summary The NLAC agreed that the aquatic vegetation management actions included in the 2011 Work Plan were fully implemented. Plants approved for control under the Ecology grant (FWL, PL, and YFI)—continued to be targeted. North Lake has been free and clear of milfoil since 2005. As a result, chemical herbicides have not been applied. This has resulted in reduced control costs and less ecological impacts. GPS shape files for those properties providing rights of entry were supplied to the contractor prior to treatment activities. The method again proved to very effective in ensuring that all targeted emergent plants were properly sprayed with herbicide. FWL is almost completely eradicated. Herbicide treatments for YFI and PL continued to be successful where applied, but some of the work has been limited because rights of entry permission have not been submitted by all property owners. Additionally, PL colonies continue to survive along parts of Weyerhaeuser's shoreline due to poor access when lake levels are low. 9.2 2012 Aquatic Vegetation Management Recommendations The following outlines recommendations for 2012: • All Aquatic Plant Management activities will be implemented through North Lake LMD Number Two. • The annual Work Plan will continue to be implemented, including conducting annual surveys, controlling noxious plants when documented, and water quality monitoring. • Conduct a thorough evaluation of native plant densities after the initial survey to identify properties with impacted beneficial uses. • Determine if sufficient funds are available to conduct bathymetry mapping. • Continue to stress open, frequent, and accurate communication with the contractor. • Continue to solicit contractor oversight assistance and follow-up observations from lake residents so that issues concerning poor treatment effectiveness can be addressed in a timely manner. • Continue to contact property owners with purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris who have not granted access to treat. • Conduct more aggressive identification and treatment of PL on Weyerhaeuser property shoreline, and continue to follow up during periods of peak bloom in order to detect colonies. • Collect appropriate water quality monitoring data to effectively calculate Trophic State Index(TSI). 19 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT 9.3 2011 Public Education Summary A wide variety of Public Education products were offered and distributed in 2011. In addition to the quarterly newsletter, the LMD distributed Washington Department of Health Toxic Blue Green Algae brochure, milfoil boater education brochures, good plant/bad plant flyers, Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese flyers, and a Be a Lake Steward flyer and press release. The lake steward flyer and press release describe everyday practices lake residents can adopt to help improve aquatic weed control and water quality of the lake. Additionally, the Public Education program was used to efficiently and effectively inform lake residents concerning the LMD process throughout 2011 by means of Lake View articles, e- subscribe,public hearings, and committee meetings. 9.4 2012 Public Education Recommendations • Continue aggressive public education effort targeting all lake properties infested with noxious weeds in order to prevent their spread. • Improve property owner right of entry participation. • Conduct semi-annual Plant ID Workshop in the summer. 20 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2011 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE Management District 2012 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Author: Dan Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................1 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT....................................................................................................................2 2.3 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM....................................................................................................................2 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT.....................................................................................3 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT...................................................................................3 5.0 2012 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES.........................................................................3 5.1 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-Noxious PLANTS...................................................................................................3 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily................................................................................................................................4 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris.......................................................................................................................................4 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife...................................................................................................................................4 5.2 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS.............................................................................................................................2 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment..............................................................................................................3 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris&Purple Loosestrife Treatment..................................................................................3 5.3 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL..................................................................................................................3 5.4 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL....................................................................................................................4 5.5 WEED RAKES...............................................................................................................................................4 5.6 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-NATIVE PLANTS.....................................................................................................4 5.7 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT..........................................................................................................6 5.8 ALGAE..........................................................................................................................................................6 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.........................................................................................................6 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT.................................................................................................9 7.1 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT........................................................................................................................9 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee(NLAC)...............................................................................................9 7.1.2 Development of 2012 Work Plan......................................................................................................... 11 7.1.3 Plant ID Workshop............................................................................................................................... 11 7.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION.................................................................................................................................... 12 7.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter............................................................................................................................ 12 7.2.2 Public Notices...................................................................................................................................... 12 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs.............................................................................................................. 12 7.2.4 Web Page Development....................................................................................................................... 12 7.2.5 Annual Report....................................................................................................................................... 13 8.0 2012 BUDGET REVIEW...........................................................................................................................13 8.1 TASKS 1 &2 BUDGET,PROJECT ADMINISTRATION/VEGETATION MANAGEMENT...................................... 14 8.2 TASK 3 PUBLIC EDUCATION....................................................................................................................... 14 8.3 TASK 4 WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM..................................................................................... 15 8.4 TASK 5 SWM STAFF TIME REIMBURSEMENT............................................................................................. 15 9.0 2012 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2013.........................................15 9.1 2012 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SUMMARY............................................................................ 15 9.2 2013 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................ 16 9.3 2012 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY......................................................................................................... 16 9.4 2013 PUBLIC EDUCATION RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................... 16 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT BLANK PAGE NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2012 North Lake Budget Overview....................................13 Table 2. 2012 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2................................14 Table 3. 2012 North Lake Budget, Task 3........................................14 Table 4. 2012 North Lake Budget, Task 4........................................15 Table 5. 2012 North Lake Budget, Task 5........................................15 Figure 1. North Lake Temperature, 2012..........................................7 Figure 2. North Lake DO, 2012........................................................8 Figure 3. North Lake T & P, Surface, 2012.........................................8 Figure 4. North Lake T & P, Bottom, 2012.........................................9 MORE NORTH LAKE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON SWM WEB PAGE http://www.cityoffederalway.com/index.aspx?nid=185 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by the North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) members and the entire lake community who contributed to the successful development of the North Lake Management District and the implementation of the 2012 aquatic plant management program. The Committee includes the following members: • Lake residents: Chuck Gibson (Chair), Wendy Honey, Terry Thomas, Robin Cook, and Mary McClellan-Aronen • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Samantha Turner • City of Federal Way: Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Hollie Shilley(ESA&NPDES Coordinator) • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: Derek Hacker In addition, Surface Water Management (SWM) staff wishes to thank the City Council and City Manager for their collective support of our aquatic weed management efforts. We also recognize Kathy Hamel, Department of Ecology (Ecology), for her continuing aquatic plant management advice and encouragement. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2012, the aquatic vegetation management actions and public education goals outlined in the North Lake Management District (LMD) 2012 Work Plan were successfully implemented. Noxious aquatic plants—fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris and narrow leaf cattail—were targeted for control at as low a density as was environmentally and economically feasible, and at levels that did not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. In addition, an effective public education program has been implemented to prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants and non-native animal species to the lake; a program that also aided in the early detection of aquatic weed re-infestations. This annual report summarizes the steps taken by the LMD during 2012 in conforming to Ordinance No. 09-622 that created Lake Management District Number 2 for North Lake. These efforts are based upon the aquatic weed management program established in the 2004 Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP) developed for North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development An Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP)is a comprehensive document that defines the management goals and strategies for on-going noxious weed control efforts. In 2004, the North Lake community coordinated with the King County Lake Stewardship group to develop an IAVMP. In addition to laying the groundwork for future aquatic weed work, an up- to-date IAVMP was required by Ecology to be submitted prior to seeking future grant funding from the State. With assistance from King County, the lake community began developing an IAVMP. During this period, efforts began to produce a Washington State Department of Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund (AWMF) grant application. A series of meetings were held throughout the summer of 2004 to gather public comment and to finalize the IAVMP. Anticipating future annexation by the City of Federal Way, Surface Water Management staff began participating in the process. The IAVMP was submitted on September 16, 2004, and Ecology issued final approval for the plan on October 8. With an approved IAVMP, application was made to Ecology for an AWMF grant. Early in 2005, the North Lake community officially became incorporated into the City of Federal Way. As a result, an AWMF grant was awarded to the City. It included a multi-year effort to fully eradicate the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The action plan included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, 1 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT control, and public education. The grant budget totaled approximately $80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The AWMP grant expired December 31, 2009. 2.2 Lake Management District In 2009, city staff and residents collaborated to form Lake Management District (LMD)Number Two for North Lake. The ten-year LMD (initiated in 20 10)was built upon the IAVMP and it was developed to generate revenue for ongoing management of aquatic vegetation, water quality education and related projects in North Lake. The district was also designed to improve the quality of life in and around North Lake for years to come with the following end result: a healthy water body that benefits lake residents, lake users, and the entire city. 2.3 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, are invasive and pose a serious threat to our State's waterbodies, such as North Lake, if left unchecked. Because nonnative plants have few natural controls in their new habitat, they spread rapidly, out-competing and effectively destroying native plant and animal habitats. This can lead to a degradation of recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties (Ecology, 2005). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur, and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major classes (A, B and C) are listed according to the seriousness of the threat they pose to the state, or a region of the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a County option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. The joint efforts undertaken by the North Lake Advisory Committee, lake residents, and SWM staff are described in this year-end report. The document also outlines the work completed to eradicate the following three noxious weed species detected in 2011: 2 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT Common Name Scientific Name Weed Class Fragrant water lily Nymphaea odorata C Yellow flag iris Iris pseudacorus C Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria B 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT In 2012, coverage under the state of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit (permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae in Steel Lake continued. The five-year NPDES permit was issued to the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex with an effective date of March 18, 2011. The permit governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The permit expires on March 18, 2016 and is issued under the authority of RCW 90.48. Such issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Ecology decided to issue a permit that is based solely on state authority to regulate the discharge of waste materials into waters of the state. 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT In 2012, AquaTechnex, Inc. operated under the first year of a four-year Professional Services Agreement (contract) with the City of Federal Way. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides), post control surveys,mapping,reports as required, and attending meetings as required. 5.0 2012 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 5.1 Systematic Survey— Noxious Plants AquaTechnex completed the initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake on June 15 and 18. For each effort, the survey team mapped all submerged, floating and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. In addition to making visual inspections, the survey team collected a number of rake samples at various GPS points. These points were collected to define each treatment area through diver communication to the mapping vessel team. The GPS information obtained in the field was later 3 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex North Lake: Report of Activities in 2012, (located on SWM web page).Native plant information may be found in Section 5.6. Noxious weeds found during the 2012 North Lake initial systematic surveys included: • Fragrant water lily(Nymphaea odroata) • Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) • Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) The following is a discussion regarding the noxious weeds found during the 2012 plant survey. 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant waterlily (FWL) is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins, recognized by the fragrant white, pink to purple, many-petaled flowers that float on the water surface. Their large, round, floating leaves have a distinctive slit on one side. Due to its attractiveness, this nonnative plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has been introduced to many lakes in Washington, but can be invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas (Ecology 2006). The June surveys located sparse FWL growth in North Lake, and as with prior years, the colonies were noted in selected areas along the shoreline perimeter. The population densities of FWL were reported to be declining in response to treatments, and nearly eliminated in developed shoreline areas. Based on the survey results, AquaTechnex recommended targeting this species with the aquatic herbicide glyphosate (Rodeo) as necessary for complete eradication. 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable with its showy yellow flowers colorfully displayed along the edge of water and in wetlands. The flowers occur in late spring or early summer. The noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed), including flower stalk, will grow up to nearly five feet tall. The rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude native wetland species (WA State Noxious Weed Control Board). The initial survey found YFI populating the shoreline perimeter in selected locations, primarily where permission to treat was not provided by the land owners. Identical to the control plan implemented during the last three seasons, glyphosate (Rodeo) would be utilized for YFI treatments. Glyphosate provides effective long-term control, with applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide into the root system. 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This erect, robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense 4 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class C Weed(Ecology, 2006). The noxious emergent plant was reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake. Because an aquatic plant survey only provides a snapshot of the conditions present in the lake at the time of the inspection, it was expected that additional PL seedlings would emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines later in the growing season. The proposed control action for PL involved herbicide application of Triclopyr (Renovate3) on private property. Therefore, permission (right of entry) from landowners around the lake was required(see Section 5.2.2). 5.2 Herbicide Treatments The herbicide treatment program was designed to meet the requirements of both the Ecology Grant Agreement and NPDES permit. Within this framework, Year Two Integrated Treatment Plan benchmarks were followed where practical. The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities into water bodies that are contiguous with rivers, creeks, and lakes; or into navigable waters. The applicator also must comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (Rodeo) was used to treat FWL and YFI colonies on North Lake in 2012. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) for aquatic applications. The active ingredient in glyphosate moves through the plant from the point of foliage contact into the root system. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days, seven days on more on most perennial weeds, and thirty days or more on most woody plants. It is known that extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects include gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which will advance to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a systemic herbicide effective in removing targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. 2 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication pursuant to the requirements outlined in the Ecology Grant Agreement. The plan was designed to achieve the following: • Gradually replace FWL with native vegetation over time to preserve and improve fish habitat. • Improve boater access and provide safer recreation opportunities, • Reduce the possibility of excessive amounts of dying vegetation that could contribute to increased nutrient loading(resulting in algae blooms). • Reduce the likelihood that excessive amounts of dying vegetation would place a demand on dissolved oxygen, thereby stressing aquatic life. The AquaTechnex 2012 North Lake Year End Report (found on the SWM website) contains maps with locations of FWL colonies. Glyphosate (Rodeo), a liquid, was applied directly on the Illy pads by a two-person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. Two separate treatments took place in 2012. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators)uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication to areas that did not uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated equaled less than one acre. 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris & Purple Loosestrife Treatment Continued eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2012. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of the emergent weeds. Maps showing YSI and PL colony locations and all lake parcels granting access for treatment may be found on the SWM website. During treatment, AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate (Rodeo). The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by a worker on foot using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex was careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied(by licensed applicators)in the same fashion as that for FWL. SWM continued coordinating with King County Noxious Weed Control Program personnel in purple loosestrife identification and control. KC-conducted PL canoe surveys (GPS coordinates) were provided to AquaTechnex. The contractor used this information to conduct more thorough shoreline inspections and follow-up selective treatment. 5.3 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake to help control the 3 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT spread of both YFI and PL. SWM staff issued notices to all lake residents regarding proper hand pulling and digging techniques for YFI. For PL, hand removal methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks)were offered as effective options, including proper disposal of all organic debris (roots, seed heads and stems). 5.4 Water Lily Island Control The NLSC agreed that floating FWL island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. No corrective action was taken in 2012. 5.5 Weed Rakes The weed rake loan program continued in 2012, providing North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain the beneficial uses of the shoreline for fishing,boating and swimming. Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline (not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the WDFW Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet. Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes depending on the type of plant targeted: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. Because milfoil was not detected during the initial survey, weed rakes were loaned out immediately to lake residents to control native aquatic plants. The program was shut down for the season on September 15 pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 5.6 Systematic Survey— Native Plants The objective of the systematic surveys is to quantify the vegetation present and to provide a continued baseline of the condition of the lake plant communities. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex North Lake: Report of Activities in 2012, (located on SWM web page). In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 5.0, the native plant species documented in 2012 included: 4 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Yellow pond lily Nuphar spp. Spatterdock Nuphar polysepalum SUBMERSED PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Muskgrass Chara sp. Naiad Najas sp. White stemmed pondweed Potamogeton praelongus American elodea Elodea Canadensis Large leaf pondweed Potamogeton amplifolius Emergent Plants Emergent plant populations were expected to be identical to those documented in 2011. Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species, Typha spp. (Cattail), Eleocharis sp. (Spike Rush), and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush), that grow in the shallow margins of a lake. The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals. Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese. All of North Lake's emergent vegetation provides habitat for amphibians and fish and help to stabilize shorelines. Floatine Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and provides spawning habitat for fish. Nuphar polysepalum (Spatterdock) is a perennial waterlily-like plant that forms extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. When mature, Spatterdock has large elephant-ear- shaped leaves and yellow flowers. Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that dominates the lake bottom. Unlike most other perennial aquatic plants, it reproduces from seed each year. The aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring, produces seeds that drop them to the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. 5 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT Other submerged plant species in the lake included Potamogeton praelongus (White stemmed pondweed). This native member of the pondweed family occurs in small clumps and was observed throughout the deeper littoral lake zones. Because of its depth, this plants did not appear to be impacting beneficial uses of the lake. The native aquatic plant Elodea acts as an under story or secondary plant in the lake, and can expand to the point of causing major problems. The absence of complaints from lake residents concerning this species indicate that beneficial uses were not impacted. Chara (Muskgrass) is a macro algae and is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. 5.7 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on September 20, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2012 on the four targeted species (FWL, PL, and YFI). All treated plants showed clear symptoms of herbicide damage. Any remaining stands of YFI and PL were primarily located on properties where permission to enter was not secured. 5.8 Algae Cyanobacteria are common in freshwater lakes, frequently forming dense populations or water blooms in eutrophic (nutrient rich)waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are light, temperature,pH, and nutrient concentrations. Because of the potential that the blooms may occur, SWM staff issues annual algae information, and algae alerts when present, to all North Lake residents. The alerts caution residents and users of the presence of toxic-producing algae and recommends safe action to prevent exposure. In addition, the information concerning the Department of Ecology Algae Control Program is provided — a program that focuses on providing local governments with the tools they need to manage algae problems. A total of$250,000 is earmarked each year to target blue-green algae due to the health risks posed to humans,pets, and livestock. No reports of blue-green algae blooms on North Lake were received in 2012. 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING Temperature and dissolved oxygen (DO) measurements were made from January through November 2012 in the center of the northern part of the lake. Measurements were taken using a YSI Model ProODO instrument at the surface and one meter intervals to the bottom. Temperatures ranged from a low of 5 C (41 F) in January to 25 C (77 F) in August. The water column temperature was relatively uniform until mid-April when significant difference, thermal 6 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT stratification, began to occur between the surface and water below 3 meters. The stratification remained until November. The maximum difference was in August with a surface temperature of 25 C(77 F) and a bottom temperature of 8 C(46 F). Figure 1, North Lake Temperature 2012 North Lake Temperature 2012 25.0 -0 M -IM 20.0 2M d m 150 3M m o000r, -4M 10.0 -5 M -6M 5.0 �7 M 8M 0.0 1\11 4\11 411 9M Date Dissolved Oxygen concentrations ranged from 11 ppm in the surface in March to less than 1 ppm below 5 M in June. DO concentrations below 5 M of less than 4 ppm existed from mid- May through early September. The water from 6 meters to the bottom had less than one ppm of dissolved oxygen from early May through early November. 7 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT Figure 2, North Lake Dissolved Oxygen 2012 North Lake DO 2012 12.0 10.0 -OM -IM 8.0 -2m E an 6.0 -3 M O � -4M A.0 -5 M 6M /M 8M 0.0 Date Nitrogen and Phosphorus concentrations were measured at surface and bottom from May through November. Total Nitrogen concentrations at the surface ranged from 0.032 mg/l to 1.42 mg/l. Bottom total nitrogen concentrations ranged from 0.14 mg/l to 0.74 mg/1. Total phosphorus concentrations at the surface were below detection limits, 0.050/mg/1, on every collection except for November when it was 0.053 mg/1. Bottom total phosphorus concentrations were below detection limits in all samples. Figure 3, North Lake Total N and Total P, Surface, 2012 North Lake Total N and Total P Surface 2012 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.W C 0.80 tlNSur 0.60 fP Sur D.40 0.20 0.00 'yV'Cr 'yam 1�P y� -1V yea 8 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT Figure 4, North Lake Total N and Total P, Bottom, 2012 North Lake TN and TP Bottom 2012 1.20 1.00 0.80 c E o.60 +TN Bottom 0.40 fTP Bottom 0.20 0.00 O '1V 'L� y�aP yfd� yea yid The nutrient data indicates that the lake phytoplankton productivity is limited by the lack of available phosphorus. 7.0 EDUCATION/PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The Education and Public Involvement Program for North Lake incorporates elements presented in the 2004 Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). Using the IAVMP, the annual Work Plan includes a Public Education element that has two components: a focus on prevention and detection of noxious aquatic and emergent weeds; and lake stewardship. The North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) oversees the implementation of the 2012 North Lake Work Plan. 7.1 Community Involvement North Lake Community Involvement program for 2012 involved the following: 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAQ The NLAC is charged with setting the aquatic plant management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. Resolution No. 09-560, passed by the City Council, created the Advisory Committee for North Lake LMD Number 2. The purpose of the NLAC is to provide for LMD property owner representation to the City Council. 9 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT Per Resolution No. 09-560,NLAC representation consists of. • Five (5) representing single family and/or vacant properties; one (1) representing Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (public boat launch property); and one (1) representing the Weyerhaeuser Corporation. Per Resolution No. 09-560, an open recruitment for selection to the NLAC took place. This process resulted in the selection of NLAC members. The 2012 NLAC members were: Member Representing Chuck Gibson Committee Chair,Lake Resident Terry Thomas Lake Resident Robin Cook Lake Resident Mary McClellan-Aronen Lake Resident Samantha Turner Weyerhaeuser Derek Hacker Washington Department of Fish&Wildlife* Note:because of potential conflicts of interest, WDFW has chosen not to be a voting member of the committee. However, they have indicated that comment will be provided if concerns arise that they are particularly interested in,such as issues with the public access property. The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities of the NLAC: • Reviews annual plant survey information. • Develops an annual aquatic plant management Work Plan based upon the information revealed in the annual plant surveys. The Work Plan prioritizes aquatic weed problem areas, identifies preferred control methods for each species, and develops the anticipated budget. • Assists the City of Federal Way with oversight of control work to keep contractors accountable. • Participates in preparation of an annual evaluation report that summarizes plant control activities, lake-user's perspectives on the plant community, and recommendations for the next year's control strategy. • Helps the City of Federal Way to ensure that all lake residents receive proper notification pursuant to the requirements of the Aquatic Plant&Algae NPDES Permit. • Participates in other annual community involvement/education strategies and plant control efforts as needed. The NLAC met three times in 2012: February 3 • Reviewed final 2011 Work Plan scope and expenses • Reviewed RFP for aquatic plant management 10 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT • Discussed and approved 2012 Work Plan May 23 • Reviewed budget • Approved four year contract for AquaTechnex(aquatic plant management) • Reviewed status of 2012 Work Plan • Discussed water quality sampling results September 25 • Reviewed budget • Reviewed aquatic plant survey results • Discussed additional water quality results The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. 7.1.2 Development of 2012 Work Plan The goals and budget regarding the 2012 Work Plan are based upon Resolution Number 09-544 to form North Lake Management District Number 2. The following is a brief outline of the 2012 Work Plan: Task 1 & 2: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted invasive aquatic weeds (milfoil, fragrant water Illy, purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris, and narrow leaf cattail), and other problematic aquatic plant issues (i.e. mud island removal) for the year. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 5.0. Task 3: Public Education describes all public education elements to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of invasive aquatic weeds. Items in Task 2 include: community meetings (spring) and Plant ID Workshop (summer); quarterly newsletter (The Lake View); boater outreach program; printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases; web site development; and development of an annual report. Task 3: Water Quality Monitoring describes the water quality sampling plan. 7.1.3 Plant ID Workshop The joint Steel Lake—North Lake Plant fD Workshop was not held in 2012. 11 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT 7.2 Public Education The North Lake Public Education program for 2012 involved the following: 7.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter SWM staff continued issuing the quarterly public education newsletter, The Lake View to all North Lake residents via US Postal Service; and to lake residents and interested parties via an email subscribe list. The newsletter, created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee, includes updates to lake residents concerning recent vegetation management activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 7.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via mail and email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. Lake residents were also sent notices prior to all public meetings. During the course of 2012, SWM staff mailed out formal public notices and followed up with supplemental notices to lake residents. In addition, periodic supplemental updates advising lake residents of work plan activities were e-mailed to subscribers approximately 24 hours prior to the activity on the lake. 7.2.3 Educational Flyers and Signs SWM staff continued to develop and issue the following lake-related informational flyers and brochures as needed: • Milfoil Boater Education • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program • Be Lake Steward 7.2.4 Web Page Development In 2012, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • Current IAVMP (with figures and maps) • 2012 Work Plan • Chronology and description of important 2012 North Lake activities • North Lake publications such as: The Lake View; informative flyers (milfoil,blue-green algae,purple loosestrife, ducks&geese,yellow flag iris, good plants/bad plants);public notices; and NLAC Meeting notes. 12 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT 7.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a final year-end report for all lake residents and parties of interest that describes the activities and a budget review of the prior year. 8.0 2012 BUDGET REVIEW The 2012 Work Plan budget was calculated based upon the scope of aquatic weed management expected to be accomplished during the year. Table 1 below provides an overview of the final North Lake aquatic plant management budget costs for 2012: Table 1. 2012 North Lake Budget Overview TASK Estimates Actual Year End (includes taxes) (includes taxes) Balance of 2011 LMD Funds $3,020 $3,439 LMD Annual Assessment $13,000 $14,648 Task 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation (-)$9,038 (-)$6,420 Management Task 3, Public Education (-)$491 (-)$295 Task 4,Water Quality Monitoring (-)$1,200 (-)$934 Task 5, SWM Staff Time Reimbursement (-)$2,600 (-)$2,509 King County Department of Assessments C ( )$324 (-)$324 Collection Fee YEAR END BALANCE $2,367 $7,607 The year-end balance includes interest income. 13 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT 8.1 Tasks 1 & 2 Budget, Project Administration/Vegetation Management Table 2 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 1 and 2. Table 2. 2012 North Lake Budget, TASK 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation Mgmt. GOAL 2012 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Annual Permit Fee(for 2012 coverage) $430.00 $453.00 RFP advertisements $177.00 $176.86 Two diver surveys(Spring&Summer) $3,395.00 $2,176.31 Milfoil herbicide treatment 0 0 Glyphosate herbicide treatment+mobilization $2,173.00 $1,806.75 Diver removal of milfoil 0 0 Advance resident notifications&postings $876.00 $492.75 Native weed manual removal $383.00 0 Water lily island control 0 0 Post control visual inspection 0 0 Discharge Management Plan $821.00 $821.25 Contractor attendance at meetings $290.00 0 Contractor final report $493.00 $492.75 TOTALS $9,038.00 $6,419.67 8.2 Task 3 Public Education Table 3 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 3. Table 3. 2012 North Lake Budget, TASK 3 Public Education GOAL 2011 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Meeting refreshments $25.00 $20.17 Quarterly newsletter $366.00 $274.35 Annual evaluation report 0 0 Annual Spring Community Meeting 0 0 Public education printing 0 0 Boater outreach program 0 0 City LMD web page 0 0 Postage $100.00 N/A TOTALS $491.00 $294.52 14 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT 8.3 Task 4 Water Quality Monitoring Program Table 4 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 4. Table 4. 2012 North Lake Budget, TASK 4 Water Quality Monitoring Program GOAL 2012 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Implement annual water quality monitoring Five(5)separate water quality program $1,200 monitoring events with lab expense TOTALS $1,200.00 $933.60 8.4 Task 5 SWM Staff Time Reimbursement Table 5 below illustrates the budgeted elements for Task 5. Table 5. 2012 North Lake Budget, TASK 5 SWM Staff Time Reimbursement GOAL 2012 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) SWM staff wages and benefits TOTALS $2,600.00 $2,509.00 9.0 2012 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2013 The following discussion summarizes the 2012 North Lake program, and outlines recornmendations for 2013: 9.1 2012 Aquatic Vegetation Management Summary • The NLAC agreed that the aquatic vegetation management actions included in the 2012 Work Plan were fully implemented. Plants approved for control under the Ecology grant (FWL, PL, and YFI)—continued to be targeted. • North Lake has been free and clear of milfoil since 2005. As a result, chemical herbicides have not been applied. This has resulted in reduced control costs and less ecological impacts. • FWL is almost completely eradicated. Herbicide treatments for YFI and PL continued to be successful where applied, but some of the work has been limited because rights of entry permission have not been submitted by all property owners. Additionally, PL colonies 15 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT continue to survive along parts of Weyerhaeuser's shoreline due to poor access when lake levels are low. 9.2 2013 Aquatic Vegetation Management Recommendations The following outlines recommendations for 2013: • All Aquatic Plant Management activities will be implemented through North Lake LMD Number Two. • The annual Work Plan will continue to be implemented, including conducting annual surveys, controlling noxious plants when documented, and water quality monitoring. • Conduct a thorough evaluation of native plant densities after the initial survey to identify properties with impacted beneficial uses. • Continue to determine if sufficient funds are available to conduct bathymetry mapping. • Continue to stress open, frequent, and accurate communication with the contractor. • Continue to solicit contractor oversight assistance and follow-up observations from lake residents so that issues concerning poor treatment effectiveness can be addressed in a timely manner. • Continue to contact property owners with purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris who have not granted access to treat. • Conduct more aggressive identification and treatment of PL on Weyerhaeuser property shoreline, and continue to follow up during periods of peak bloom in order to detect colonies. • Collect appropriate water quality monitoring data to effectively calculate Trophic State Index(TSI). 9.3 2012 Public Education Summary A wide variety of Public Education products were offered in 2012. In addition to the quarterly newsletter, the LMD has provided Washington Department of Health Toxic Blue Green Algae brochure, milfoil boater education brochures, good plant/bad plant flyers, Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese flyers, and a Be a Lake Steward flyer on the SWM website. Additionally, the Public Education program was used to efficiently and effectively inform lake residents concerning the LMD process throughout 2012 by means of Lake View articles, e- subscribe,public hearings, and committee meetings. 9.4 2013 Public Education Recommendations • Continue aggressive public education effort targeting all lake properties infested with noxious weeds in order to prevent their spread. • Improve property owner right of entry participation. 16 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2012 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE Management District 2013 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................2 2.0 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................2 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT AND ECOLOGY GRANT FUNDING............................................................................2 2.2 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT....................................................................................................................3 2.3 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM....................................................................................................................3 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT.....................................................................................3 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT...................................................................................4 5.0 BATHYMETRY MAPPING................................................................................................................................4 6.0 2013 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES.........................................................................6 6.1 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY—Noxious PLANTS...................................................................................................6 6.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily................................................................................................................................6 6.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris.......................................................................................................................................6 6.1.3 Purple Loosestrife................................................................................................................................... 7 6.2 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS.............................................................................................................................7 6.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment..............................................................................................................8 6.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris&Purple Loosestrife Treatment..................................................................................8 6.3 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL..................................................................................................................9 6.4 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL....................................................................................................................9 6.5 WEED RAKES...............................................................................................................................................9 6.6 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY—NATIVE PLANTS................................................................................................... 10 6.7 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT........................................................................................................ 11 6.8 BENEFICIAL USES....................................................................................................................................... 11 6.9 BLUE-GREEN ALGAE.................................................................................................................................. 11 6.10 FILAMENTOUS ALGAE................................................................................................................................ 12 7.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................................................................12 8.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/PUBLIC EDUCATION...............................................................................15 8.1 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT............................................................................................................................... 15 8.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee(NLAC)............................................................................................. 15 8.1.2 Development of 2013 Work Plan......................................................................................................... 16 8.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION.................................................................................................................................... 17 8.2.1 Quarterly Newsletter............................................................................................................................ 17 8.2.2 Public Notices...................................................................................................................................... 17 8.2.3 Educational Materials.......................................................................................................................... 17 8.2.4 Web Page............................................................................................................................................. 17 8.2.5 Annual Report....................................................................................................................................... 18 9.0 2013 BUDGET REVIEW...........................................................................................................................18 9.1 2013 WORK PLAN TASKS 1&2 BUDGET,PROJECT ADMINISTRATION/ VEGETATION MANAGEMENT.... 18 9.2 2013 WORK PLAN TASK 3 PUBLIC EDUCATION.......................................................................................... 19 9.3 2013 WORK PLAN TASK 4 WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM.......................................................20 9.4 2013 WORK PLAN TASK 5 SWM STAFF TIME REIMBURSEMENT...............................................................20 10.0 2013 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2013.........................................20 10.1 2013 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SUMMARY............................................................................20 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2013 FINAL REPORT 10.2 2014 AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................21 10.3 2013 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY.........................................................................................................21 10.4 2014 PUBLIC EDUCATION RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................................................22 APPENDIX A,AQUATECHNEX FINAL 2013 REPORT....................................................................................A NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2013 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2013 North Lake Water Quality Data..................................12 Table 2. 2013 North Lake Budget Overview.....................................17 Table 3. 2013 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2.................................18 Table 4. 2013 North Lake Budget, Task 3........................................18 Table 5. 2013 North Lake Budget, Task 4........................................19 Table 6. 2013 North Lake Budget, Task 5........................................19 Figure 1. North Lake Bathymetry Contour Map, 2013...........................5 Figure 2. North Lake Bathymetry Relief Map, 2013..............................5 Figure 3. North Lake Temperature, 2013..........................................13 Figure 4. North Lake DO, 2013.......................................................13 Author and Contact Information Dan Smith Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator City of Federal Way, Washington Public Works Department Division of Surface Water Management 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98063 (253) 835-2756 daniel.smith@cityoffederalway.com For more information contact: Public Works,phone (253) 835-2700. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2013 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by the North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) members and the entire lake community who contributed to the successful development of the North Lake Management District and the implementation of the 2013 aquatic plant management program. The Committee includes the following members: • Lake residents: Chuck Gibson (Chair), Terry Thomas, Robin Cook, Mary McClellan- Aronen, and Brian Cleary • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Samantha Turner • City of Federal Way: Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Hollie Shilley(ESA&NPDES Coordinator) • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: Derek Hacker NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2013 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) and Surface Water Management (SWM) successfully implemented the following goals as outlined in the annual LMD Work Plan: • Identified noxious aquatic plants (fragrant water lily,purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris) were targeted for control at as low a density as was environmentally and economically feasible and at levels that did not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. • An effective public education program was undertaken that continued to help prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants, and non-native animal species into the lake. • A comprehensive water quality monitoring program was implemented through the year to provide important data concerning the health of North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development and Ecology Grant Funding Prior to annexation into the City of Federal Way in 2005, North Lake was within the jurisdictional boundary of unincorporated King County. Leading up to annexation, the lake community had been implementing an informal aquatic plant management program for a number of years. But starting in 2004, a more formal effort was undertaken when North Lake began coordinating with King County in the development of an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP)--a comprehensive document that establishes all future goals and strategies for freshwater lake noxious weed management. Anticipating that North Lake would soon become part of the city, SWM staff began collaborating with King County to finalize of the North Lake IAVMP (a document required by the Washington Department of Ecology for future grant funding). Consequently,North Lake was soon awarded a four-year Washington State Department of Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund (AWMF) grant in 2005 with SWM designated as the administrator. The action plan outlined in the grant included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education designed to fully eradicate the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The grant budget totaled approximately$80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The AWMP grant expired December 31, 2009. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2 2013 FINAL REPORT 2.2 Lake Management District While the AWMF grant program was being implemented, city staff and residents began meeting with the intent to form a Lake Management District for North Lake as a means to provide long- term funding throughout the duration of the ten-year district (2010-2019). Per RCW 36.61, annual assessments collected from LMD property owners for a ten year period will fund the following: ongoing aquatic vegetation management, water quality monitoring, public education, and related lake improvement programs. 2.3 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to the State of Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, are invasive, and pose a serious threat to our state's waterbodies (including North Lake) if left unchecked. Because noxious plants have few natural controls, they spread rapidly, out-compete and effectively destroy native plant and animal habitats. This can lead to a degradation of recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties(Ecology, 2005). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board (Weed Board) classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur; and, (3) prevent their movement to un- infested areas of Washington. The following three major noxious weed classifications are listed according to the seriousness of the threats posed to the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a county option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT In 2013, coverage for North Lake continued under the state of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit (permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae. Permit issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Effective March 18, 2011, the five-year NPDES permit (issued under the NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 3 2013 FINAL REPORT authority of RCW 90.48) has been implemented by the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex, LLC. The permit governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The permit expires on March 18, 2016. 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT In 2013, AquaTechnex operated under the second year of a four-year Professional Services Agreement with the City of Federal Way. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides), post control surveys,mapping,reports, and attending meetings as required. 5.0 BATHYMETRY MAPPING Bathymetry is an underwater study of a lake's topography. As a lake ages, it undergoes numerous changes which alters its appearance below the surface. Bathymetry mapping provides a means to physically delineate lake-bottom relief(or terrain). Mapping assists in the understanding of lake sedimentation and siltation, and also provides information concerning underwater locations where aquatic plant growth(both native and non-native)is occurring. Unfortunately, bathymetry maps available for North Lake were outdated and more than 30 years old. Accordingly, the LMD authorized an effort to produce state-of-the-art bathymetry mapping and 3D modeling. Updated mapping was performed on March 12, 2013 by AquaTechnex when the lake was at full pool. To complete the bathymetry mapping effort, AquaTechnex utilized a vessel equipped with a system linked to a Trimble GPS data logger with sub-foot accuracy, and a hydro-acoustic depth sounding system with 0.2 foot accuracy. The system collected GPS points and depth readings every two seconds as the boat travelled around the lake. A pre-designed mapping protocol was followed with transects made across the lake at approximately twenty-foot intervals. The project generated a total of 11,163 sampling points. The collected data was shipped to Mapping Networks geographers for processing. ArcGIS software and other technologies were used to develop accurate bathymetry maps and 3D models of the lake bottom. Additionally, important lake information including the exact area (54.1 acres), maximum depth (38.3 feet), and mean depth (11 feet)were calculated. From the collected data, electronic bathymetry map graphics were generated and laminated map copies depicting lake-bottom relief and contour lines were distributed to all individual LMD property owners. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 4 2013 FINAL REPORT Figure 1,2013 North Lake Bathymetry Contour Map a� 7i na��iecenni`°� North Lake Muppin NeMrk Federal Way,WA Figure 2,2013 North Lake Bathymetry Relief Map I A f 4 ��dneK North Lake M`appn�bhvork Federal Way,WA NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 5 2013 FINAL REPORT 6.0 2013 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 6.1 Systematic Survey— Noxious Plants AquaTechnex completed the annual initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake on June 10, 2013. The survey consisted of transects being recorded at approximately 400-500 foot intervals around the shoreline, with rake-toss samples taken in a line perpendicular to the shoreline to determine the presence and abundance of the lake's aquatic plant species. During the effort, the survey team mapped all submerged, floating, and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex Report: North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2013, (Appendix A).Native plant information is provided below in Section 6.6. Noxious weeds found during the 2013 North Lake initial systematic survey included: • Fragrant water lily, (Nymphaea odroata), Class C • Yellow flag iris, (Iris pseudacorus), Class C • Purple loosestrife, (Lythrum salicaria), Class B The following is a discussion regarding noxious weeds documented during the 2013 plant survey. 6.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant waterlily(FWL) is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins. It is recognized by its fragrant (white, pink to purple in color) flowers that float on the water surface; and by its large, round, floating leaves that have distinctive slits on one side. Due to its attractiveness, this nonnative plant has been introduced to many lakes in Washington. Unfortunately, FWL is a noxious plant that can become invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas such as North Lake (Ecology 2006). Therefore it is listed as a State of Washington Class C Weed. The June survey documented sparse FWL growth in North Lake, and as with prior years, the colonies were observed to be sporadically located along the shoreline perimeter. The population densities of FWL continue to decline in response to annual LMD-funded treatments. Based on the survey results, AquaTechnex recommended continued targeting of this species with the aquatic herbicide glyphosate (Rodeo) as necessary until it is completely eradicated. 6.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable along the edge of water and in wetlands. Its yellow-colored flowers bloom in late spring or early summer. This noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has a flower stalk that grows up to nearly five feet tall. Additionally, the rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude more desirable native wetland species. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 6 2013 FINAL REPORT The initial June survey found sparse populations of YFI along the shoreline perimeter (primarily where permission to treat was not provided by land owners). Identical to the control plan implemented during the last three seasons, glyphosate (Rodeo) treatments are utilized annually until complete eradication is achieved. 6.1.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This erect, robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class C weed(Ecology, 2006). It has been necessary to perform multiple surveys through the summer to map PL locations because the plant's seedlings tend to emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines during the entire growing season. In 2013, this noxious emergent plant was reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake in densities that have been dramatically diminishing year-to-year. The proposed control action for PL involved several scheduled herbicide applications of triclopyr (Renovate3) on private property via permission (right of entry) from landowners. 6.2 Herbicide Treatments The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities in lakes, and the applicator must also comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (Rodeo) was used to treat FWL and YFI colonies on North Lake in 2013. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) for aquatic applications. With applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide down into the root system, glyphosate provides effective long-term control. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days; seven days or more on most perennial weeds; and thirty days or more on most woody plants. However, extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects of glyphosate treatment includes gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which then advances to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a systemic herbicide which is effective in the removal of targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 2013 FINAL REPORT • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. Triclopyr Triclopyr (Renovate 3) is a liquid aquatic herbicide labeled for control of submersed, emergent and floating plants in and around aquatic sites such as lakes. The active ingredient (triclopyr) rapidly enters through the targeted plant leaves and stems and interferes with the plant's metabolism. The aquatic herbicide impacts most dicot (broadleaf) plants, and has little to no impact on most monocots (grassy type species). It is highly effective in selectively targeting purple loosestrife and carries no restrictions on recreational use such as swimming and fishing in the treatment area. 6.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication. The control plan was designed to achieve the following: • Allow for the gradual replacement of FWL with native vegetation to improve fish habitat. • Improve boater access and provide safer recreational opportunities. • Reduce the possibility of excessive amounts of dying vegetation (which contributes to an increase in nutrient loading that may result in more frequent algae blooms). • Limit the production of dead vegetation which reduces the likelihood for higher oxygen demand in the water column. The AquaTechnex Report: North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2013, (Appendix A) contains maps locating FWL colonies. Glyphosate (Rodeo), a liquid, was applied directly on the lily pads by a two-person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. Three separate treatments took place in 2013: July 19, August 18 and September 13. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied (by licensed applicators) uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication as necessary to areas that did not initially uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated equaled less than one acre. 6.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris & Purple Loosestrife Treatment Continued eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2013. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of these emergent plant species. During treatment,AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate(Rodeo)for YFI and triclopyr (Renovate 3) for PL. The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by licensed applicators using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex personnel were careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses during treatment activity. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 8 2013 FINAL REPORT In accordance with state law, the King County Noxious Weed Control Board requires property owners to control purple loosestrife on private and public lands throughout the county (control means to prevent all seed production and to prevent the dispersal of all propagative parts capable of forming new plants). In 2013, both SWM and AquaTechnex continued coordinating with King County in the identification and control of PL on North Lake. Survey information is shared annually between each agency; this effort leads to a markedly improved identification program that allows for more effective treatment and control, Therefore, a larger percentage of PL colonies can be eraticated. 6.3 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake themselves to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM provides information regarding proper manual control methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks), and the proper disposal of all organic debris(roots, seed heads, and stems) for both YFI and PL. 6.4 Water Lily Island Control Floating mud islands, resulting from past herbicide treatment of fragrant water lily colonies, are characterized by suspended masses of organic deposits (plant roots, peat and mud) that range in size from a few inches to a few feet thick. Gasses can build up from decomposing fibrous material and may lift the plant roots and parts of the lake bottom to the surface to form mud islands that can migrate from property-to-property. The NLAC agreed that floating mud island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. Although floating mud islands have been problematic in the past,none formed in 2013. 6.5 Weed Rakes In 2013, the weed rake loan program continued to provide North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain beneficial uses (fishing, boating and swimming) along private shorelines. Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline (not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the "FW Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet(publication 4APF-1-98). Depending on the type of plant targeted,North Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. SWM staff take care each growing season to ensure proper use of weed rakes. For instance, if mifoil is present, the action of the rake may fragment the noxious plant and allow it to uncontrollably spread throughout the lake. Because neither milfoil nor any other submersed noxious aquatic plants were detected during the initial 2013 survey, weed rakes were able to be NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9 2013 FINAL REPORT loaned out immediately to lake residents to control native aquatic plants when needed. The weed rake program was shut down for the season on September 15 pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 6.6 Systematic Survey— Native Plants The objective of the systematic survey is to quantify the presence and location of all aquatic plant vegetation (native and non-native) on North Lake. Detailed survey information and mapping may be found in the AquaTechnex Report: North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2013, (Appendix A). In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 6.1, the following information details the native plant species populating North Lake during 2013: FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Yellow pond lily Nuphar spp. Spatterdock Nuphar polysepalum SUBMERSED PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Muskgrass Chara sp. Naiad Najas sp. White stemmed pondweed Potamogeton praelongus American elodea Elodea Canadensis Large leaf pondweed Potamogeton amplifolius Bladderwort Utricularia Emergent Plants Emergent plant populations were identical to those documented the previous year. Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species that grow in the shallow margins of the lake: Typha spp. (Cattail) and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush). The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals. Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese and provide habitat for amphibians and fish. Additionally, all of North Lake's emergent vegetation helps to stabilize shorelines and reduce erosion. Floatine Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 10 2013 FINAL REPORT provides spawning habitat for fish. Nuphar polysepalum (Spatterdock) is a perennial waterlily- like plant. When mature, Spatterdock has large elephant-ear-shaped leaves and yellow flowers. Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that dominates the lake bottom. Unlike most other perennial aquatic plants, it reproduces from seed each year. This aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring and produces seeds that drop into the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. Other submerged plant species observed in North Lake included: • Potamogeton praelongus (White stemmed pondweed). This native member of the pondweed family occurs in small clumps and was observed throughout the deeper littoral lake zones. • Elodea, a native plant that acts as an under story or secondary plant in the lake. • Chara (Muskgrass), a macro algae that is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. 6.7 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on October 3, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2013 on the four targeted species (FWL, PL, and YFI). All targeted plants showed clear symptoms of herbicide damage. Surviving stands of YFI and PL were primarily located on properties where permission to enter was not secured. 6.8 Beneficial Uses Impairment of beneficial use is defined as a change in the integrity of North Lake sufficient to cause any use impairment to recreational activities (boating, fishing and swimming). Based upon the results of each systematic survey, AquaTechnex biologists reported that aquatic plant species (emergent, floating, or submersed) were never at high enough densities during 2013 that adversely impacted the beneficial uses of North Lake. 6.9 Blue-Green Algae Blue-Green algae (cyanobacteria) are common in freshwater lakes, and they frequently form dense populations (blooms) in eutrophic (nutrient rich) waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are: light, temperature, pH, and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous). Large blue-green blooms can pose a human health concern. Although most are non-toxic, some blue-green algae produce nerve or liver toxins. Toxicity is difficult to predict because a single species of algae can produce both toxic and non-toxic strains. Additionally, a bloom that tests NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 11 2013 FINAL REPORT non-toxic one day can turn toxic the next day. People may become ill after coming into contact with lake waters that are impacted with toxic blue-green algae. Humans may experience stomach pains, vomiting, diarrhea, and skin rashes; and nerve and liver damage have been observed following long-term exposure (such as drinking impacted water). Although pets and wildlife have died after exposure to toxic blue-green algae in Washington lakes, there have been no confirmed human deaths reported worldwide (Ecology, 2013). In 2011, SWM was awarded a Freshwater Algae Control Program Grant from the Department of Ecology for the management of algal blooms occurring in City of Federal Way freshwater lakes (including North Lake). The four-year project improves and enhances the Lake Management District's algal bloom management efforts by providing: (1) a response to reports (early detection investigations and water quality sampling/analysis), (2) public notification, and, (3) data reporting. SWM staff issues information and alerts to all residents when blue-green algae is present. The alerts caution residents and users to the presence of toxic-producing algae, and recommends safe action for the prevention of exposure. When necessary, SWM staff collects samples and has them identified through the Department of Ecology Algae Control Program. In 2013, SWM staff responded to a citizen complaint concerning a possible algae bloom at the south end of North Lake. A water sample was collected on March 28 and submitted for analysis through the Ecology Algae Control Program. Although blue-green algae was detected in the sample, the lab results indicated that toxin levels were below minimum detection limits. Therefore, SWM advised the lake community through timely notifications that a public health threat was not present. 6.10 Filamentous Algae Filamentous algae (Spirogyra) are an abundant non-toxic variety of algae commonly found in freshwater lakes that are typically identified by their bright, almost neon-green color. Inflation by gasses may cause them to billow underwater. Additionally, they may quickly reproduce and will cling to surfaces in characteristic hair-like mats. The WA Department of Ecology states that filamentous green algae can sometimes create problems when it grows in "cotton candy-like" clouds in the water; but generally, most filamentous algae are not problematic and are a good food source for zooplankton. If filamentous algae is found growing to such an extent where it may be impacting the beneficial uses of the lake, SWM advises lake residents that the harmless algae may simply be raked out of the water, dried out on the grass or a beach, and disposed of with lawn waste. 7.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING In 2013, measurements of temperature and dissolved oxygen were collected by a lake volunteer on eighteen(18) separate dates (from February through November). Using a YSI Model ProODO instrument, measurement-taking began at the surface level and continued downward at one meter intervals to the bottom. The temperature followed the normal and expected pattern of increasing surface temperatures of about 6 degrees C in February to 27 degrees C in July and back to 10 degrees C in November. The temperature at the bottom ranged from 6 degrees C in February to NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 12 2013 FINAL REPORT 10 degrees in November. Stratification began to strengthen in June and remained until mid- September(See Figure 2). Dissolved oxygen concentrations at the surface ranged from a high of 10 ppm in March to a low of 7.5 ppm in July. Low dissolved oxygen began to occur at the bottom in March. By July, low dissolved oxygen was measured from 4 meters depth to the bottom. In November the dissolved oxygen levels became uniform throughout the water column (See Figure 2). Physical water samples were also collected for nutrient, chlorophyll, UV 254 and phytoplankton on three separate dates: September 16, October 14 and October 28. These samples were analyzed by the King County Environmental Laboratory. Prior to 2005, volunteer lake monitors working under the guidance of King County Water and Land Resources Division, collected water quality data from North Lake (physical, chemical, and biological). This program was suspended in 2005 due to annexation of North Lake by the City of Federal Way. Fortunately, beginning in 2014, all North Lake water quality data will undergo quality control and will again be entered into the King County Small Lakes Stewardship database so that water quality trends may continue to be tracked over the long term. These data may be used to assess North Lake, and may help to guide future lake protection and stewardship activities. Tabulated 2013 results are shown below: Table 1, 2013 North Lake Water Quality Data Dates Location September 16, 2013 October 13, 2013 October 28, 2013 Surface,Total Nitrogen 0.476 0.576 0.465 (mg/L) Bottom Total Nitrogen 0.705 0.989 0.441 (mg/L) Surface,Total 0.0099 0.0158 0.147 Phosphorus(mg/L) Bottom Total Phosphorus 0.0356 0.0525 0.0107 (mg/L) Surface, Chlorophyll-a 2.89 4.51 5.1 (ug/L) Surface Pheophytin-a <MDL 2.62 <MDL (ug/L) UV Absorbance(1/cm) 0.153 0.162 0.175 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 13 2013 FINAL REPORT Figure 3, North Lake Temperature Data 2013 North Lake Temperature 2013 30.f I 250 --*-0 M V ch f 1 M a> 20.0 f2 M a� 15.0 +4 M co t5 M W 10.0 CL E ~ 5.0 7 M 8M 0.0 --4 9 M cam' o ff' off' Figure 4, North Lake Dissolved Oxygen Data 2013 North Lake Dissolved Oxygen 2013 12.0 10.0 --0-0 M 8.0 t 1 M f2 M CL 3 M '27 6 0 '2 —*(--4 M 4.0 —�--6 M —7M 2.0 —8 M t9 M 0.0 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 14 2013 FINAL REPORT 8.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/PUBLIC EDUCATION Public involvement and public education for North Lake incorporates elements and concepts presented in the 2004 Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). Using the IAVMP, the annual Work Plan strives to improve lake health through the promotion of lake stewardship and through the implementation of educational programs designed to help lake residents and lake users detect and prevent the spread of noxious aquatic plant species. 8.1 Public Involvement The North Lake Public Involvement program for 2013 included the following: 8.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAQ The NLAC is charged with setting lake management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. Resolution No. 09-560, passed by the City Council, created the Advisory Committee for North Lake LMD Number 2. The purpose of the NLAC is to provide for LMD property owner representation to the City Council. Per Resolution No. 09-560,NLAC representation consists of. • Five (5) representing single family and/or vacant properties; one (1) representing Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (public boat launch property); and one (1) representing the Weyerhaeuser Corporation. Currently, the resolution calls for a maximum term for property owners of two years (with a maximum of two terms allowed). The 2013 NLAC members were: Member Representing Term Expiration Chuck Gibson Committee Chair, Lake Resident March 15,2014,Second Term Terry Thomas Lake Resident March 15,2014,Second Term Robin Cook Lake Resident March 15,2014,Second Term Mary McClellan-Aronen Lake Resident March 15,2014, First Term Brian Cleary Lake Resident March 15,2014, First Term Samantha Turner Weyerhaeuser N/A Derek Hacker Washington Department of Fish& N/A Wildlife" Note:Because of potential conflicts of interest, WDFW has chosen not to be a voting member of the committee. However, they have indicated that comment will be provided if concerns arise which particularly interest them (i.e., issues with the public access property). NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 15 2013 FINAL REPORT The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities and duties of the NLAC: • Assists in the development of an annual lake management Work Plan and budget. • Participates in evaluation of aquatic plant control activities and helps to recommend annual control strategies. • Participates in other community involvement/education strategies efforts as needed. The NLAC met three times in 2013: February 7 • Reviewed final 2012 Work Plan scope and expenses • Discussed and approved 2013 Work Plan • Reviewed bathymetry mapping results • Reviewed water quality data June 3 • Reviewed budget • Reviewed status of 2013 Work Plan • Discussed water quality sampling results November 22 • Reviewed budget • Reviewed aquatic plant survey results • Discussed additional water quality results The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. 8.1.2 Development of 2013 Work Plan The goals and budget regarding the 2013 Work Plan are based upon Resolution Number 09-544 to form North Lake Management District Number 2. The following is a brief outline of the 2013 Work Plan approved by the NLAC: Task 1 &2: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment: Identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted noxious aquatic plant species. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the stated goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 6.0. Task 3: Public Education: Describes all public involvement and public education elements designed to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of noxious aquatic weeds and the presence of non-native species in North Lake. Items in Task 2 may include: community meetings (spring) and Plant ID Workshop (summer); quarterly newsletter (The Lake View); boater outreach program; printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases; web site development; and development of an annual report. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 16 2013 FINAL REPORT Task 3: Water Ouality Monitoring: Describes the water quality sampling plan designed to measure and track the health of North Lake. 8.2 Public Education The North Lake public education program for 2013 involved a combination of the following: quarterly newsletter,public notices, and educational materials. 8.2.1 Newsletter SWM staff issued the publication The Lake View to all North Lake once in 2013 via US Postal Service and through the city's email subscribe list. The newsletter(created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee), includes updates to lake residents concerning recent LMD activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 8.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. All NLAC meetings were advertised on the city's Calendar of Events web page. 8.2.3 Educational Materials SWM staff continued to develop and issue the following lake-related informational flyers and brochures as needed: • Milfoil Boater Education • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program • Be Lake Steward • Permanent signage at the public boat launch. 8.2.4 Web Page In 2013, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • AquaTechnex Report:North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2013 • Right of Entry form • Advisory Committee Application • The Lakeview NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 17 2013 FINAL REPORT 8.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a North Lake LMD final year-end report that describes all significant LMD program information and activities. 9.0 2013 BUDGET REVIEW The 2013 Work Plan budget was calculated based upon the LMD scope of work expected to be accomplished during the year. Table 2 below provides an overview of the final North Lake LMD budget costs for 2013: Table 2. 2013 North Lake Budget Overview TASK Work Plan Estimates Actual Year End (includes taxes) (includes taxes) Balance of 2012 LMD Funds $7,607 $7,607 LMD Annual Assessment $14,500 $13,029 Task 1 &2, Project Administration/Vegetation $11,310 $8,841 Management Task 3, Public Education $791 $411 Task 4,Water Quality Monitoring $1,200 $879 Task 5, SWM Staff Time Reimbursement $2,600 $2,317 YEAR END BALANCE $5,822 $8,189 The year-end balance includes interest income. 9.1 2013 Work Plan Tasks 1 & 2 Budget, Project Administration/ Vegetation Management Table 3 below illustrates the budgeted elements for 2013 Work Plan Task 1 and 2. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 18 2013 FINAL REPORT Table 3. 2013 North Lake Work Plan TASK 1 &2 Budget, Project Administration/Vegetation Management GOAL 2013 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Annual Permit Fee(for 2013-14 coverage) $450.00 $475.00 Two diver surveys(Spring&Summer) $3,000.00 $1,806.75 Milfoil herbicide treatment 0 0 Glyphosate herbicide treatment+mobilization $1,900.00 $821.25 Diver removal of milfoil 0 0 Advance resident notifications&postings $500.00 $325.50 Native weed control $300.00 0 Water lily island control 0 0 Bathymetry mapping $4,380.00 $4380.00 Contractor attendance at meetings $290.00 $372.30 Contractor final report $490.00 $657.00 TOTALS $11,310.00 $8,840.80 9.2 2013 Work Plan Task 3 Public Education Table 4 below illustrates the budgeted elements for the 2013 Work Plan Task 3. Table 4. 2013 North Lake Work Plan, TASK 3 Budget, Public Education GOAL 2013 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Meeting refreshments $25.00 $12.44 Quarterly newsletter,development&printing $366.00 $91.45 Annual evaluation report 0 0 Spring Community Meeting 0 0 Bathymetry map printing $300.00 $306.60 Boater outreach program 0 0 City LMD web page 0 0 Postage $100.00 0 TOTALS $791.00 $410.49 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 19 2013 FINAL REPORT 9.3 2013 Work Plan Task 4 Water Quality Monitoring Program Table 5 below illustrates the budgeted elements for the 2013 Work Plan Task 4. Table 5. 2013 North Lake Work Plan, TASK 4 Budget,Water Quality Monitoring Program GOAL 2013 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) Implement annual water quality monitoring program $1,200.00 $879.00 TOTALS $1,200.00 $879.00 9.4 2013 Work Plan Task 5 SWM Staff Time Reimbursement Table 6 below illustrates the budgeted elements for the 2013 Work Plan Task 5. Table 6. 2013 North Lake Work Plan, TASK 5 Budget, SWM Staff Time Reimbursement GOAL 2013 Work Plan Actual Expenses Estimated Expenses (includes taxes) SWM staff wages and benefits $2,600.00 $2,316.50 TOTALS $2,600.00 $2,316.50 10.0 2013 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2013 The following discussion summarizes the 2013 North Lake program, and outlines recommendations for 2014: 10.1 2013 Aquatic Vegetation Management Summary • The NLAC agreed that the aquatic vegetation management actions included in the 2013 Work Plan were fully implemented. Plants approved for control include FWL,PL, and YFI. These noxious plants continued to be targeted and are now found to be diminishing within the lake system. • North Lake has been free and clear of milfoil since 2005. As a result of the successful LMD program, chemical herbicide applications have not been necessary to control this extremely noxious plant. This success has resulted in reduced year-to-year milfoil control costs and less ecological impacts to the lake. • FWL is almost completely eradicated and the beneficial uses of the lake have improved. • Herbicide treatments for YFI and PL was successful, although some work has been limited because rights of entry permission have not been submitted by all property owners. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 20 2013 FINAL REPORT • Ongoing coordination with King County continued for PL identification and control. • AquaTechnex continues to pinpoint and target sparse PL colonies that survive along the difficult to access Weyerhaeuser shoreline. • The 2013 bathymetry mapping effort provided updated information concerning the lake- bottom terrain of North Lake. This information will assist in the understanding of lake sedimentation and siltation, and may also be used in identifying the location of noxious weed habitat and potential infestation areas. • The water quality monitoring program became more comprehensive and incorporated improved laboratory methodology(King County)in 2013. 10.2 2014 Aquatic Vegetation Management Recommendations The following outlines recommendations for 2014: • All aquatic plant management activities will be implemented through North Lake LMD Number Two: annual surveys, control of noxious plants when documented, water quality monitoring, and a public education program. • A thorough evaluation of native plant densities will be performed after the initial survey to identify properties with impacted beneficial uses. • Open, frequent, and accurate communication with the contractor will be carried out. • Lake residents will be encouraged to provide oversight of contractor activity when necessary to ensure treatment effectiveness. • Property owners with purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris colonies who have not granted access to treat will be contacted so that they may provide up-to-date rights of entry as necessary. • Purple loosestrife survey and control coordination with King County will continue. • Aggressive identification and treatment of PL on Weyerhaeuser property shoreline will be carried out, with follow up during periods of peak bloom in order to detect stray colonies. • Water quality monitoring data will be collected so that the calculation of the Trophic State Index(TSI)can be accomplished. • Water quality monitoring data will be imported into the King County Small Lakes Stewardship database and posted on the public website. • The need to collect the annual CPI assessment increase, and the need to suspend annual assessment collection altogether for a few years, will be evaluated by the NLAC (Note: these actions require City Council approval). 10.3 2013 Public Education Summary A wide variety of public education products were offered in 2013. In addition to the quarterly newsletter, the LMD has provided Washington Department of Health Toxic Blue Green Algae brochure, milfoil boater education brochures, good plant/bad plant flyers, "Four Reasons Not to NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 21 2013 FINAL REPORT Feed the Ducks or Geese" flyers, and a "Be a Lake Steward" flyer on the SWM website. Additionally, the Public Education program was used to efficiently and effectively inform lake residents concerning the LMD process throughout 2013 by means of Lake View articles, e- subscribe, and NLAC meetings. 10.4 2014 Public Education Recommendations • Continue aggressive public education effort targeting all lake properties infested with noxious weeds in order to prevent their spread. • Improve property owner right of entry participation. • Amend Resolution No. 09-560 to remove NLAC membership limit of two consecutive terms • Effectively recruit for full NLAC membership. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 22 2013 FINAL REPORT APPENDIX A AquaTechnex Report: North Lake Summary of Activities in 2013 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT A 2013 FINAL REPORT Y M NORTH LAKE : SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES IN 2013 3/201 3iii North Lake, Federal Way WA Prepared by AquaTechnex, LLC. North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2013 North Lake : Summary of Activities in 2 PREPARED BY AQUATECHNEX , LLC . Introduction The residents of North Lake have been active for several years in their mission to protect the natural resource available just outside their door. The residents have formed into a Lake Management District and the management of the lake is facilitated by the City of Federal Way. The main objective being to protect the water quality of North Lake and to monitor and control invasive weed growth in and around the lake. Treatment activity at North Lake over the years has had a significant impact on the noxious aquatic plant community which was very dominant in several areas around the lake at one point. At the beginning, the entire littoral edge of the lake was overrun by Eurasian Milfoil, a submerged aquatic weed that poses a serious threat to the beneficial uses of an infested body of water. There were also extensive areas dominated by Fragrant Water Lily and a number of emergent species growing along the shoreline of the lake. Over the past several years the activities undertaken by the City have reduced the impact of these noxious weeds significantly. The current management strategy for North Lake is to monitor and identify any new introductions of noxious weeds and to continue the eradication efforts of the remaining infestations. AquaTechnex has been contracted to provide survey and aquatic plant management services at North Lake for the several years. Our survey and control efforts in 2013 focused on the continued monitoring of Yellow Flag Iris, Fragrant Water Lily, and Purple Loosestrife populations around the lake as well as for any new introductions. This report summarizes the operations at North Lake. Page 1 North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2013 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2013 Survey Summary The first survey of North Lake occurred on June l Ot". The lake was surveyed by boat, and the entire lake was surveyed with an initial pass to search for any Eurasian Milfoil and to note other noxious weeds such as Yellow Flag Iris and Fragrant Water Lily and native emergent plants. A systematic survey was then conducted around the lake. Transects were followed at approximately 400-500 foot intervals around the shoreline. Rake-toss samples were taken in a line perpendicular to the shoreline at specific intervals (5, 10, 15 and 20 foot depth contours). During the diver-tow survey a SCUBA equipped diver was towed through the 10-15 foot contour of the lake to locate any plants which may be growing just out of site of the initial visual and systematic surveys. The plant community in North Lake has stayed relatively constant over the last 5-10 years we have been involved with the lake. Overall plant growth has not been excessive when compared year to year. The native plant continues to be dominated by Najas sp. This plant does not typically reach the surface but in areas where water depths are low (especially towards the end of the summer) it can become an impediment. This situation may exist more in the south end of the lake and the extreme north end. To a lesser extent Elodea, Whitestem Pondweed, and Largeleaf Pondweed play an important role. These plants are usually occupying the deeper areas and offer a diverse habitat for the fishery in the lake. In speaking with several fishermen on the lake there is a very healthy population of Largemouth Bass. Noxious weeds such as Yellow Flag Iris and Fragrant Water Lily were also mapped, however Purple Loosestrife was not growing to a point where a complete survey would note all plants around the lake and a focused survey was completed a couple of weeks later. A survey for PL was also completed by King County. The data from both surveys was combined to direct treatment activities. The fall survey took place on October 3rd. The purpose of this survey was to have a look at the plant community in the fall and note the effects of the season's treatments. The YFI, FWL, and purple loosestrife were all examined during this survey. With the exception of the extreme north end there does not appear to be any FWL growing in the main body North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2013 of the lake. There may be some growing within the dense cattail stands and this will be investigated closer in 2014 while surveying the cattails themselves (see below). No milfoil was located in North Lake in 2013. Noxious Weed Control Efforts Fragrant Water Lily (Nymphaea odorata) and Yellow Flag Iris (Iris pseudacorus) North Lake has had a very aggressive program focusing on Fragrant Water Lily (FWL) and Yellow-Flag Iris (YFI). Treatments took place on July 19th, August 16th, and September 1 3th. During the fall survey there were no FWL plants located in the main body of the lake. This season was basically spent cleaning up the isolated patches. The only "hold- out" zone is the north end where treatment conditions are generally less than ideal. Continued applications will remove the remaining plants next season. Yellow-flag Iris still maintains a hold around the lake. The last two seasons have had very aggressive treatments of the shorelines. Waders and backpacks have been used while walking the entire shoreline. The majority of zones have been reduced to very small patches. Invasive Cattail For the past several years treatments have taken place to control an invasive species of cattail. It appears that both of the known stands have been completely eliminated. There was a recent decision by the WA State Noxious Weed Board to add all known hybrid crosses of our native cattail (Typha Iatifoiia) with any non-native species. Careful attention must be paid to the existing stands of cattail around the lake to confirm they are not the known invasive or a hybrid cross of the two. Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum saiicaria) Purple Loosestrife (PL) is a State listed Class-A noxious weed and its control is required by law. North Lake has a well-established community of this plant. Though it can be found sporadically around the lake, the largest stands are in the undeveloped shoreline areas (west and north). Due to the aggressive nature of this plant a great deal of time and energy is focused on mapping and control. King County does its own surveys in Page 3 North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2013 several locations for Class-A noxious weeds, and one of those survey spots is North Lake. King County Staff performs a survey of the PL each summer and they share the results of that survey with our staff. The data from our survey is combined with their survey and that information is used to direct treatment efforts. Flagging is also used in the field to make plants more visible for treatment. Purple Loosestrife was treated during all three treatment dates. The aquatic herbicide Triclopyr (Renovate 3) was applied to the plants - thoroughly coating the leaves. Maps are included at the end of this report noting the areas treated for PL. There continues to be a good amount of PL growing in the extreme north end of the lake. Access to this area is particularly difficult. Rains this year in September kept water levels up higher than normal which hindered efforts to wade/walk through the muddy shoreline to treat some locations. Damage to plants was very obvious during follow up treatments and the end of the year survey. Other Notables North Lake went ahead with bathymetry mapping this spring. A very high quality map was created showing the depths all around the lake. The maps produced were turned over to the City of Federal Way and the North Lake LIVID. Unlike several of lakes in the King County metro area, North Lake has not been experiencing any issues with large Blue-green Algae blooms. During the October survey small colonies of algae were floating around the lake but it was not possible to identify at that time. The growth was not anywhere near a point were concern is needed but we now know there is a possibility. New introductions of noxious weeds are not uncommon and it is important for shoreline residents to remain vigilant in keeping an eye on their lake. Recently our company started working on a lake in Kent where within the last 3 years there has been an introduction of Curly leaf Pondweed. This is a Class-C noxious weed which can be very difficult and expensive to control. With a public access point on North Lake there is Page 4 North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2013 always a chance for new plants to be introduced and if anything out of the ordinary or "new" looking appears it should be reported to the City right away. Please feel free to contact Adam Kleven at 360-508-1276 or Adam@aquatechnex.com with any questions. Thank you for your time and consideration. . M w,. r- • ON • ! /R x " 110 00 k� y AL 70, A ., da"W". 0 AT 41 -9-11, l " l� Aw V��R 9M Legend T _W No Plants AquaTechnex Native Plant Pointao[ (�� o 0 0 0 p •, 1• I n vn m n . w i "i" 1r Legend . ._ - Bladderwart Largeleaf M ` . 00 Chara =.�_ � Whitestem _ Najas . M � t r r• ,r ! /�. x " c k� y t W i Ce,,, VA _ m ♦ :. ,�. a `a ► e'7K�''� AT �.•.. y� - Legend Purple_L • Yellow Flag Iris Cattail Bullrush � " sedgeo—M, NA,0 n WISPN)(1 AquaTeChnex r M • • w • +Awi. x " /R c k 'w. 'M. ... • �'• �' •� •.;� � is Ilk, s t W .' • is II�.I� I�� '. v 4y 1p AT l� V��1• Legend Purple_L _ M • Yellow Flag Iris • Water Lily :M, � o�% AquaTechnex ,„ . M /R x " mow"'''""tet .�"� y •� '"".pk+-+, � R Ir j Tom^ AlAWW" "Now �. 400*r �F rl } 9M Legend T W PL_Treat2 � " AquaTechnex PL Treat oma,mmm� o Track « NORTHJUNE2013.s12 ,� 6/10/2613 1:11 PM T ,f � J v, • �. P I r*m IW I c 1 • �� X2013 Mic ,t9Co�or �2D36 NAV3E D k�. Ymage cou SGS Track "tF NORTHJUNE2013s12 n _ G s C N � v x. -r .. a� � a 5•�� 2D33 M-_ �-'�r2D10 HA D NORTH LAKE Management District 2014 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................1 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT AND ECOLOGY GRANT FUNDING............................................................................ 1 2.2 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT....................................................................................................................2 2.3 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM....................................................................................................................2 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT.....................................................................................2 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT...................................................................................3 5.0 2014 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES.........................................................................3 5.1 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY—Noxious PLANTS...................................................................................................3 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily................................................................................................................................3 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris.......................................................................................................................................4 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife...................................................................................................................................4 5.2 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS.............................................................................................................................4 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment..............................................................................................................5 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris&Purple Loosestrife Treatment..................................................................................6 5.3 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL..................................................................................................................6 5.4 WATER LILY ISLAND CONTROL....................................................................................................................6 5.5 WEED RAKES...............................................................................................................................................7 5.6 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY—NATIVE PLANTS.....................................................................................................7 5.7 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT..........................................................................................................9 5.8 NATIVE GROWTH AND IMPACTS TO BENEFICIAL USES.................................................................................9 5.9 BLUE-GREEN ALGAE....................................................................................................................................9 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................................................................10 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/PUBLIC EDUCATION...............................................................................12 7.1 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT............................................................................................................................... 12 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee(NLAC)............................................................................................. 12 7.1.2 Development of 2014 Work Plan......................................................................................................... 14 7.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION.................................................................................................................................... 15 7.2.1 Newsletter............................................................................................................................................. 15 7.2.2 Public Notices...................................................................................................................................... 15 7.2.3 Educational Materials.......................................................................................................................... 15 7.2.4 Web Page............................................................................................................................................. 15 7.2.5 Annual Report....................................................................................................................................... 16 8.0 2014 BUDGET REVIEW...........................................................................................................................16 APPENDIX A,AQUATECHNEX REPORT: NORTH LAKE SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES IN 2014.........19 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2014 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2014 North Lake Water Quality Data...................................12 Table 2. 2014 North Lake LIVID Assessment Rates............................17 Table 3. 2014 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2.................................17 Table 4. 2014 North Lake Budget, Task 3........................................17 Table 5. 2014 North Lake Budget, Task 4........................................17 Table 6. 2014 North Lake Budget, Task 5........................................18 Table 7. 2014 North Lake LIVID Budget Totals...................................18 Figure 1. North Lake Temperature, 2014..........................................11 Figure 2. North Lake DO, 2014.......................................................11 Author and Contact Information Dan Smith Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator City of Federal Way, Washington Public Works Department Division of Surface Water Management 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98063 (253) 835-2756 daniel.smith@cityoffederalway.com For more information contact: Public Works,phone (253) 835-2700. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2014 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by the North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) members and the entire lake community who contributed to the successful development of the North Lake Management District and the implementation of the 2013 aquatic plant management program. The Committee includes the following members: • Lake residents: Chuck Gibson (Chair), Terry Thomas, Robin Cook, Mary McClellan- Aronen, and Brian Cleary • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Samantha Turner • City of Federal Way: Dan Smith (Surface Water Quality Program Coordinator) and Hollie Shilley(ESA&NPDES Coordinator) • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: Derek Hacker NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2014 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) and Surface Water Management (SWM) successfully implemented the following goals as outlined in the annual LMD Work Plan: • Identified noxious aquatic plants (fragrant water lily,purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris) were targeted for control at as low a density as was environmentally and economically feasible and at levels that did not impact public safety or the beneficial uses of the lake. • An effective public education program was undertaken that continued to help prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants, and non-native animal species into the lake. • A comprehensive water quality monitoring program was implemented through the year to provide important data concerning the health of North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development and Ecology Grant Funding Prior to annexation into the City of Federal Way in 2005, North Lake was within the jurisdictional boundary of unincorporated King County. Leading up to annexation, the lake community had been implementing an informal aquatic plant management program for a number of years. But starting in 2004, a more formal effort was undertaken when North Lake began coordinating with King County in the development of an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP)--a comprehensive document that established all future goals and strategies for freshwater lake noxious weed management. Anticipating that North Lake would soon be annexed into the city, SWM staff began collaborating with King County to finalize of the North Lake IAVMP (a document required by the Washington Department of Ecology for future grant funding). Consequently,North Lake was awarded a four-year Washington State Department of Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund (AWMF) grant in 2005 with SWM designated as the administrator. The action plan outlined in the grant included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education designed to begin eradication of the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water Illy,purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The grant budget totaled approximately$80,000,with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The AWMP grant expired December 31, 2009. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 1 2014 FINAL REPORT 2.2 Lake Management District While the AWMF grant program was being implemented, city staff and residents began meeting with the intent to form a Lake Management District for North Lake as a means to provide long- term funding mechanism. In 2010, a ten-year LMD was formed. Per RCW 36.61, annual assessments collected from LMD property owners funds the following programs: ongoing aquatic vegetation management, water quality monitoring, public education, and related lake improvement programs. 2.3 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to the State of Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, are invasive, and pose a serious threat to our state's waterbodies (including North Lake) if left unchecked. Because noxious plants have few natural controls, they spread rapidly, out-compete and effectively destroy native plant and animal habitats. This can lead to a degradation of recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties(Ecology, 2005). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board (Weed Board) classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur; and, (3) prevent their movement to un- infested areas of Washington. The following three major noxious weed classifications are listed according to the seriousness of the threats posed to the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a county option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT In 2014, coverage for North Lake continued under the state of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit (permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae. Permit issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Effective March 18, 2011, the five-year NPDES permit (issued under the NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2 2014 FINAL REPORT authority of RCW 90.48) has been implemented by the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex, LLC. The permit governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The permit expires on March 18, 2016. 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT In 2014, AquaTechnex operated under the third year of a four-year Professional Services Agreement with the City of Federal Way. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides), post control surveys,mapping,reports, and attending meetings as required. 5.0 2014 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 5.1 Systematic Survey— Noxious Plants AquaTechnex completed the annual initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake on June 10, 2014. The survey consisted of transects being recorded at approximately 400-500 foot intervals around the shoreline, with rake-toss samples taken in a line perpendicular to the shoreline to determine the presence and abundance of the lake's aquatic plant species. During the effort, the survey team mapped all submerged, floating, and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex Report: North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2014, (Appendix A).Native plant information is provided below in Section 5.6. Noxious weeds found during the 2014 North Lake initial systematic survey included: • Fragrant water lily, (Nymphaea odroata), Class C • Yellow flag iris, (Iris pseudacorus), Class C • Purple loosestrife, (Lythrum salicaria), Class B The following is a discussion regarding noxious weeds documented during the 2014 plant survey. 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant waterlily(FWL)is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins. It is recognized by its fragrant (white, pink to purple in color) flowers that float on the water surface; and by its large, round, floating leaves that have distinctive slits on one side. Due to its NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 3 2014 FINAL REPORT attractiveness, this nonnative plant has been introduced to many lakes in Washington. Unfortunately, FWL is a noxious plant that can become invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas such as North Lake (Ecology 2014). Therefore it is listed as a State of Washington Class C Weed. The June survey documented sparse FWL growth in North Lake, and as with prior years, the colonies were observed to be sporadically located along the shoreline perimeter. The population densities of FWL continue to decline in response to annual LMD-funded treatments. Based on the survey results, AquaTechnex recommended continued targeting of this species with the aquatic herbicide glyphosate (Rodeo) as necessary until it is completely eradicated. 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable along the edge of water and in wetlands. Its yellow-colored flowers bloom in late spring or early summer. This noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has a flower stalk that grows up to nearly five feet tall. Additionally, the rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude more desirable native wetland species. The initial June survey found sparse populations of YFI along the shoreline perimeter (primarily where permission to treat was not provided by land owners). Identical to the control plan implemented during the last three seasons, glyphosate (Rodeo) treatments are utilized annually until complete eradication is achieved. 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class C weed(Ecology, 2014). Because the plant's seedlings tend to emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines during the entire growing season, it has been necessary to perform multiple surveys through the summer to map PL locations. In 2014, this noxious emergent plant was reported to be widely scattered along the shorelines of the lake in densities that have been dramatically diminishing year-to-year. The proposed control action for PL involved several scheduled herbicide applications of triclopyr (Renovate3) on private property via permission(right of entry) from landowners. 5.2 Herbicide Treatments The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities in lakes, and the applicator must also comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 4 2014 FINAL REPORT Glyphosate Glyphosate (Rodeo) was used to treat FWL and YFI colonies on North Lake in 2014. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) for aquatic applications. With applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide down into the root system, glyphosate provides effective long-term control. Visible effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days; seven days or more on most perennial weeds; and thirty days or more on most woody plants. However, extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects of glyphosate treatment includes gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which then advances to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a systemic herbicide which is effective in the removal of targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. Triclopyr Triclopyr (Renovate 3) is a liquid aquatic herbicide labeled for control of submersed, emergent and floating plants in and around aquatic sites such as lakes. The active ingredient (triclopyr) rapidly enters through the targeted plant leaves and stems and interferes with the plant's metabolism. The aquatic herbicide impacts most dicot (broadleaf) plants, and has little to no impact on most monocots (grassy type species). It is highly effective in selectively targeting purple loosestrife and carries no restrictions on recreational use such as swimming and fishing in the treatment area. 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication. The control plan was designed to achieve the following: • Allow for the gradual replacement of FWL with native vegetation to improve fish habitat. • Improve boater access and provide safer recreational opportunities. • Reduce the possibility of excessive amounts of dying vegetation (which contributes to an increase in nutrient loading that may result in more frequent algae blooms). • Limit the production of dead vegetation which reduces the likelihood for higher oxygen demand in the water column. The AquaTechnex Report: North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2014, (Appendix A) contains maps locating FWL colonies. Glyphosate (Rodeo), a liquid, was applied directly on the lily pads by a two-person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. Two separate NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 5 2014 FINAL REPORT treatments took place in 2014. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied (by licensed applicators) uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication as necessary to areas that did not initially uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated equaled less than one acre. 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris & Purple Loosestrife Treatment Continued eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2014. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of these emergent plant species. In 2014, 75% of North Lake residents have granted access for emergent treatment. During treatment,AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate(Rodeo)for YFI and triclopyr (Renovate 3) for PL. The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by licensed applicators using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex personnel were careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses during treatment activity. In accordance with state law, the King County Noxious Weed Control Board requires property owners to control purple loosestrife on private and public lands throughout the county (control means to prevent all seed production and to prevent the dispersal of all propagative parts capable of forming new plants). In 2014, both SWM and AquaTechnex continued coordinating with King County in the identification and control of PL on North Lake. Survey information is shared annually between each agency; this effort leads to a markedly improved identification program that allows for more effective treatment and control, Therefore, a larger percentage of PL colonies can be eradicated. 5.3 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake themselves to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM provides information regarding proper manual control methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks), and the proper disposal of all organic debris(roots, seed heads, and stems) for both YFI and PL. 5.4 Water Lily Island Control Floating mud islands, resulting from past herbicide treatment of fragrant water lily colonies, are characterized by suspended masses of organic deposits (plant roots, peat and mud) that range in size from a few inches to a few feet thick. Gasses can build up from decomposing fibrous material and may lift the plant roots and parts of the lake bottom to the surface to form mud islands that can migrate from property-to-property. The NLAC agreed that floating mud island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. Although floating mud islands have been problematic in the past,none formed in 2014. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 6 2014 FINAL REPORT 5.5 Weed Rakes In 2014, the weed rake loan program continued to provide North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain beneficial uses (fishing, boating and swimming) along private shorelines. Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline (not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the WDFW Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet (publication 4APF-1-98). Depending on the type of plant targeted,North Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. SWM staff take care each growing season to ensure proper use of weed rakes. For instance, if mifoil is present, the action of the rake may fragment the noxious plant and allow it to uncontrollably spread throughout the lake. Because neither milfoil nor any other submersed noxious aquatic plants were detected during the initial 2014 survey, weed rakes were able to be loaned out immediately to lake residents to control native aquatic plants when needed. The weed rake program was shut down for the season on September 15 pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 5.6 Systematic Survey— Native Plants The objective of the systematic survey is to quantify the presence and location of all aquatic plant vegetation (native and non-native) on North Lake. Detailed survey information and mapping may be found in the AquaTechnex Report: North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2014, (Appendix A). In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 5.1, the following information details the native plant species populating North Lake during 2014: FLOATING PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Yellow pond lily Nuphar spp. Spatterdock Nuphar polysepalum NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 2014 FINAL REPORT SUBMERSED PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Muskgrass Chara sp. Naiad Najas sp. White stemmed pondweed Potamogeton praelongus American elodea Elodea Canadensis Large leaf pondweed Potamogeton amplifolius Bladderwort Utricularia Emergent Plants Emergent plant populations were identical to those documented the previous year. Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species that grow in the shallow margins of the lake: Typha spp. (Cattail) and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush). The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals. Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese and provide habitat for amphibians and fish. Additionally, all of North Lake's emergent vegetation helps to stabilize shorelines and reduce erosion. Floating Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and provides spawning habitat for fish. Nuphar polysepalum (Spatterdock) is a perennial waterlily- like plant. When mature, Spatterdock has large elephant-ear-shaped leaves and yellow flowers. Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that dominates the lake bottom. Unlike most other perennial aquatic plants, it reproduces from seed each year. This aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring and produces seeds that drop into the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. Other submerged plant species observed in North Lake included: • Potamogeton praelongus (White stemmed pondweed). This native member of the pondweed family occurs in small clumps and was observed throughout the deeper littoral lake zones. • Elodea, a native plant that acts as an under story or secondary plant in the lake. • Chara (Muskgrass), a macro algae that is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 8 2014 FINAL REPORT 5.7 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on October 21, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2014 on the four targeted noxious species (FWL, PL, and YFI). All targeted plants showed clear symptoms of herbicide damage. Surviving stands of YFI and PL were primarily located on properties where permission to enter was not secured. 5.8 Native Growth and Impacts to Beneficial Uses The native plant community in North Lake has a level of diversity common for the lakes in this area. Additionally, the community exhibits a relative dominance of one species over all others: Najas flexilis. This plant is native to Washington but has the ability to grow to nuisance levels in an urban lake environment like North Lake. In recent summers, a small number of residents have complained about excessive Najas growth—an observation that is most probably linked to recently warmer spring and summers. The resulting extended growing season causes plant growth to peak towards the beginning of August, and increasing plant densities observed well into September. When aquatic plant growth is excessive, it may impair beneficial uses for lake residents—for example, impairment to recreational activities (boating, fishing and swimming). In 2014, AquaTechnex biologists reported that the density of the submerged aquatic plant Najas was high enough in one distinct area to potentially adversely impact the beneficial uses of North Lake (the eastern shore cove area). Consequently the contractor proposed that this location be treated with the contact herbicide Diquat dibromide. On August 19, the North Lake Advisory Committee approved herbicide treatments in select nuisance areas identified by AquaTechnex. Follow up inspections performed during the Second Aquatic Plant Survey on October 21 indicated that the nuisance herbicide treatments were successful in restoring lake access. Additionally, affected lakeside residents reported complete satisfaction with the control work. 5.9 Blue-Green Algae Blue-Green algae (cyanobacteria) are common in freshwater lakes, and they frequently form dense populations (blooms) in eutrophic (nutrient rich) waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are: light, temperature, pH, and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous). Large blue-green blooms can pose a human health concern. Although most are non-toxic, some blue-green algae produce nerve or liver toxins. Toxicity is difficult to predict because a single species of algae can produce both toxic and non-toxic strains. Additionally, a bloom that tests non-toxic one day can turn toxic the next day. People may become ill after coming into contact with lake waters that are impacted with toxic blue-green algae. Humans may experience stomach pains, vomiting, diarrhea, and skin rashes; and nerve and liver damage have been observed following long-term exposure (such as drinking impacted water). Although pets and wildlife NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9 2014 FINAL REPORT have died after exposure to toxic blue-green algae in Washington lakes, there have been no confirmed human deaths reported worldwide (Ecology, 2014). There were no reports of blue-green algae blooms in North Lake in 2014. 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING The King County Lake Stewardship Program Volunteer Monitoring Program for North Lake began in the 1980s and continued for several decades until budget cuts ended the program in 2005. Although the most recent data generated by this program (nine years prior to the date of this report) indicated that North Lake had been relatively low in primary productivity(borderline oligotrophic to mesotrophic) with very good water quality, a significant data gap exists between then and now. The long-term objectives of the current North Lake Management District Water Quality Monitoring Program include: (1) continuation of the gathering of baseline data with the intent of assessing long-term trends; (2) defining seasonal and water column variability; (3) identifying potential problems, proposing possible management solutions when feasible, or pinpointing additional studies to be made; and (4) educating lake residents, lake users, and policy makers regarding lake water quality. Monitoring this year began in early summer, with samples collected from the surface and one meter above the bottom from the deepest part of the lake to define changes found in the vertical profiles of the parameters. These data will not be useful to assess water quality trends and the ecology of North Lake until several years-worth have been collected. Data are currently being posted on the King County Small Lakes Data website: http://green2.kin.qcounty..qov/smaIlLakes/W QData.aspx In 2014, measurements of temperature and dissolved oxygen on North Lake were collected by a lake volunteer on fourteen (14) separate dates (from March through October). Using a YSI Model ProODO instrument, measurement-taking began at the surface level and continued downward at one meter intervals to the bottom. The temperature followed the normal and expected pattern of increasing surface temperatures of about 10 degrees C in March to 24 degrees C in August and back to 16 degrees C in October. The temperature at the bottom ranged from 6 degrees C in March to 10 degrees in October. Stratification began to strengthen in June and remained until mid- September(See Figure 1). Dissolved oxygen concentrations at the surface ranged from 9.2 ppm in March to a low of 7.2 ppm in June. Low dissolved oxygen began to occur at the bottom in April. By late June, low dissolved oxygen was measured from 4 meters depth to the bottom. Low dissolved oxygen persisted below 5 meters into October(See Figure 2). Physical water samples were also collected for nutrient, chlorophyll, UV 254 and phytoplankton on 12 separate dates: May 5 through October 20. These samples were analyzed by the King County Environmental Laboratory. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 10 2014 FINAL REPORT Figure 1, North Lake Temperature 2014 North Lake Temperature 2014 30.0 25.0 t0 M t1M 20.0 f2M v M p --4�--4 M 10.0 �5 M 5.0 t6 M -7M on 9 M Figure 2. North Lake Dissolved Oxygen 2014 North Lake DO 2014 12.0 -$--0 M 10.0 f 1 M -dp-2M 8.0 -0*-3 M E 6.0 --*-4 M 4.0 -410-5 M t6 M 2.0 —7 M 0.0 —8M yy�ai yyPQc ti fav 1y�°� titi>J\ yyPJ� ��S�Q y o`` 1y��, -0-9 M NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 11 2014 FINAL REPORT Table 1. Total Nitrogen, Total Phosphorus, Chlorophyll-a and UV absorbance data for North Lake 2014 Date Surface Total Bottom Total Se Bottom Total Surface UV Total Nitrogen Nitrogen phosphorus phosphorus Chloraphyll-a Absorbance 5/5/14 0.457 0.799 0.0139 0.0401 3.67 ND 5/19/14 0.555 0.923 0.0175 0.0621 27.4 ND 6/2/14 0.462 0.675 0.0089 0.0302 8.13 0.216 6/16/14 0.510 0.756 0.147 0.295 10.2 0.209 6/30/14 0.517 0.748 0.0197 0.0264 2.34 0.201 7/21/14 0.424 1.4 0.0116 0.0833 1.3 0.192 8/11/14 0.365 1.17 0.0095 0.112 1.2 0.177 8/25/14 0.422 0.986 0.0079 0.0178 1.5 0.171 9/8/14 0.41 1.87 0.0068 0.193 1.43 0.162 9/22/14 0.399 1.18 ND 0.113 2 0.158 10/6/14 0.384 1.01 0.0078 0.0731 2.33 0.153 10/20/14 0.414 2.4 0.0052 0.257 2.33 0.152 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/PUBLIC EDUCATION Public involvement and public education for North Lake incorporates elements and concepts presented in the 2004 Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). Using the IAVMP, the annual Work Plan strives to improve lake health through the promotion of lake stewardship and through the implementation of educational programs designed to help lake residents and lake users detect and prevent the spread of noxious aquatic plant species. 7.1 Public Involvement The North Lake Public Involvement program for 2014 included the following: 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAQ The NLAC is charged with setting lake management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. Resolution No. 09-560, passed by the City Council, created the Advisory Committee for North Lake LMD Number 2. The purpose of the NLAC is to provide for LMD property owner representation to the City Council. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 12 2014 FINAL REPORT Per Resolution No. 09-560,NLAC representation consists of. • Five (5) representing single family and/or vacant properties; one (1) representing Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (public boat launch property); and one (1) representing the Weyerhaeuser Corporation. Currently, the resolution calls for a maximum term for property owners of two years (with a maximum of two terms allowed). The 2014 NLAC members were: Member Representing Term Expiration Chuck Gibson Committee Chair, Lake Resident March 15,2016,Second Term Terry Thomas Lake Resident March 15,2016,Second Term Robin Cook Lake Resident March 15,2016,Second Term Mary McClellan-Aronen Lake Resident March 15,2014, First Term Brian Cleary Lake Resident March 15,2016, First Term Samantha Turner Weyerhaeuser N/A Derek Hacker Washington Department of Fish& N/A Wildlife" Note:Because of potential conflicts of interest, WDFW has chosen not to be a voting member of the committee. However, they have indicated that comment will be provided if concerns arise which particularly interest them (i.e., issues with the public access property). The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities and duties of the NLAC: • Assists in the development of an annual lake management Work Plan and budget. • Participates in evaluation of aquatic plant control activities and helps to recommend annual control strategies. • Participates in other community involvement/education strategies efforts as needed. The NLAC met formally five times in 2014: January 15 • Met with City Attorney to review committee duties and procedures • Reviewed final 2013 Work Plan scope and expenses • Discussed suspending annual CPI rate increase • Reviewed and approved 2014 Work Plan • Discussed NLAC term limits and recruitment • Public education NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 13 2014 FINAL REPORT March 12 • Reviewed and approved additional items concerning 2014 Work Plan • More discussion about CPI • Discussed NLAC application process April 15 • No quorum July 29 • Reviewed annual plant survey results • Brief update of budget • Vote to suspend CPI increase next year(with Council approval) • Public education. August 19 • Discussion concerning excessive submerged native plant growth around Larry Flesher's property • Committee approves limited herbicide treatment in nuisance plant growth area October 15 • CPI update • Reviewed success of native plant treatments • NLAC agrees on a long-term plan to monitor native treatment The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. 7.1.2 Development of 2014 Work Plan The goals and budget regarding the 2014 Work Plan are based upon Resolution Number 09-544 to form North Lake Management District Number 2. The following is a brief outline of the 2014 Work Plan approved by the NLAC: Task 1 &2: Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment: Identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted noxious aquatic plant species. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the stated goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 6.0. Task 3: Public Education: Describes all public involvement and public education elements designed to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of noxious aquatic weeds and the presence of non-native species in North Lake. Items in Task 2 may include: community meetings (spring) and Plant ID Workshop (summer); quarterly newsletter (The Lake View); boater outreach program; printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases; web site development; and development of an annual report. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 14 2014 FINAL REPORT Task 3: Water Ouality Monitoring: Describes the water quality sampling plan designed to measure and track the health of North Lake. 7.2 Public Education The North Lake public education program for 2014 involved a combination of the following: quarterly newsletter,public notices, and educational materials. 7.2.1 Newsletter SWM staff issued the publication The Lake View quarterly to all North Lake residents 2014 via US Postal Service and through the city's email subscribe list. The newsletter(created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee), includes updates to lake residents concerning recent LMD activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 7.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. All NLAC meetings were advertised on the city's Calendar of Events web page. 7.2.3 Educational Materials SWM staff continued to develop and issue the following lake-related informational flyers and brochures as needed: • Milfoil Boater Education • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program • Be Lake Steward • Permanent signage at the public boat launch. 7.2.4 Web Page In 2014, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept fresh and up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • AquaTechnex Report:North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2014 • Right of Entry form • Advisory Committee Application • The Lakeview NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 15 2014 FINAL REPORT 7.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a North Lake LMD final year-end report that describes all significant LMD program information and activities. 8.0 2014 BUDGET REVIEW Table 2 lists individual property types and their North Lake LMD assessment rates for 2014. Table 2. 2014 LMD Property Assessment Rates Assessment Projected Total Parcel Type Number Fee per Parcel 2014 Type *Assessments Single Family 53 $107.27 $5,685.31 Vacant 9 Various $316.84 Lake access properties 2 $80.45 $160.90 Weyerhaeuser properties 17 Various $3,086.89 State Parcel(WDFW Boat Launch) 1 $4,290.90 $4,290.90 TOTAL ASSESSMENTS $13,540.84 *Projected total assumes 100%collection. The information provided below consists of task-by-task work plan goals/scope of work and their associated expenditures for 2014. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 16 2014 FINAL REPORT Table 3. Task 1 &2, Aquatic Vegetation Control/Treatment Estimated Total Actual 2014 Work Plan Goals/Scope Expenses Expenses (includes taxes) (includes taxes) 2014 Weed Permit Annual Fee(for 2015 coverage) $475 Two systematic aquatic plant surveys performed per contract Scope of Work. $1,645 Includes post control inspection. Milfoil herbicide treatment. Estimated 4 acres treatment at$800/acre. 0 Milfoil diver hand pulling. Estimated 3 hours at$150/hr. 0 Glyphosate treatment of yellow flag iris(YFI). Estimated 1.0 hours at$125/hr.and $825 mobilization costs Advance resident notification per permit requirements. $330 Native pondweed chemical control by contractor(biologist to determine if beneficial 0 uses are impacted). Requires SLAC approval. Estimate 1 acre treatment(Diquat) Final Report per Scope of Work $950 Contractor to attend SLAC meetings. Estimated one per year. $375 TASK 1 -Totals $4,600 $7,696 Table 4. Task 3, Public Education Estimated Actual 2014 Work Plan Goals/Scope Expenses Expenses (includes taxes) (includes taxes) Refreshments and supplies for quarterly Advisory Committee meetings $25 A quarterly newsletter will be distributed to all LMD residents. This publication will include:Advisory Committee Meeting minutes, plant management activities, $375 aquatic plant educational materials, and informative water quality-related topics. TASK 2—Totals $400 $303 Table 5. Task 4,Water Quality Monitoring Estimated Actual 2014 Work Plan Goals/Scope Expenses Expenses (includes taxes) (includes taxes) Estimate twelve(12)annual on-lake monitoring events and travel time:28 SWM man hours at$50/hour. Estimate twelve(12)rounds of lab sample analysis per $3,600 year. Estimate twelve(12)man hours of data management per year at$50/hour. Purchase of one YSI ODO probe($1,200)and one lake water grab sampler($500). Task 5 Totals(Estimated$5,600 annually after 2014 start-up) $3,600 $3,737 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 17 2014 FINAL REPORT Table 6. Task 5, SWM-implemented 2014 LIVID Efforts Estimated Actual 2014 Work Plan Goals/Scope Expenses Expenses (includes taxes) (includes taxes) SWM staff LMD efforts during 2014 $3,000 Task 8 Totals $3,000 $3,434 Table 7. Table 3.2014 North LIVID Budget Totals Estimates Actual (includes taxes) (includes taxes) 2013 LMD Balance Carried Forward $8,189 $8,189 2014 Assessment Collection(includes interest) $13,000 $12,303 TOTAL 2014 REVENUE $21,189 $20,492 TASK 1 &2. Aquatic Vegetation Control/Treatment $4,600 $7,696 TASK 3. Public Education $400 $303 TASK 4. Water Quality Monitoring $3,600 $3,737 TASK 5. SWM-implemented LMD Efforts $3,000 $3,434 TOTAL 2014 EXPENSES Includes A)Use Tax, etc. $11,600 $15,170 FINAL 2014 LIVID FUND BALANCE $9,589 $5,322 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 18 2014 FINAL REPORT APPENDIX A AquaTechnex Report: North Lake Summary of Activities in 2014 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 19 2014 FINAL REPORT _ � �«. . , . � < • , ww NORTH LAKE SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES IN 2014 @ @ and $ $ Prepared by AquaTechnex, LLC. North Lake - Summary of Activities in 2014 North Lake - Summary of Activities in 2014 2014 — SURVEY AND CONTROL SUMMARY Introduction The residents of North Lake formed into a Lake Management District in an effort to proactively and collectively manage and care for the lake and its aquatic plant community in an effort to increase or maintain the beneficial uses of the lake. The management is aided by the City of Federal Way to help manage collected funds and maintain the direction chosen by the LMD. The main objective being to protect the water quality of North Lake and to monitor and control invasive weed growth in and around the lake. North Lake has a history of being impacted by noxious weeds. Fragrant Water Lily, Yellow Flag Iris, Purple Loosestrife, and Eurasian Milfoil have all been present in the past or are currently still persisting as a member of the plant community. Eurasian milfoil was infesting the lake at one point, but a whole- lake application of Sonar herbicide eliminated the plant from the lake. The lake is surveyed twice annually and no additional milfoil has been located. AquaTechnex has been contracted to provide survey and aquatic plant management services at North Lake for the several years. Our survey and control efforts in 2013 focused on the continued monitoring of noxious weed populations and control activities to reduce their presence. The first application to control excessive native plant growth in North Lake took place in 2013. This report summarizes the operations at North Lake. 2014 Survey SummaLy Page 1 North Lake - Summary of Activities in 2014 ----------_ ------ -- The first survey of North Lake occurred on June 10th. There are several aspects of the survey completed and typically they are completed one at a time with a few trips around the lake. This allows the biologists and technicians to focus on each task separately and also increase their familiarity with the lake. The lake was surveyed by boat, and the entire lake was surveyed with the first pass of the lake taking the crew around the lake in the shallow, 6 feet deep or less area of the lake. This area is easily checked from the surface for milfoil and any other submerged noxious weed species which may have been introduced to the lake. Once this initial pass is completed the plant community is sampled with a series of rake-tosses to collect samples of the plants at given depth ranges throughout the lake. Transects running perpendicular from the shore were traveled and at the 5, 10, 15, and 20 foot depth contour a rake-toss sample was made. The species collected on the rake as well as the relative density of the species at that point were recorded. Following the transect and plant community data collection, a diver equipped with SCUBA was towed around the lake to inspect additional areas. The diver is towed through approximately the 10-14 foot depth contour. This is due to the fact milfoil is rarely seen beyond that depth and because the visual survey cannot easily see clearly any plants growing beyond 10 feet deep. Because Purple Loosestrife is growing along the shoreline at North Lake, and because it is classified as a Class A Noxious weed in Washington, King County performs additional surveys to locate and assess control. King County biologists survey the lake and flag locations in an effort to help the control efforts. The GIS data collected by the County during the survey is typically passed on to our staff and utilized in treatment efforts. The fall survey took place on October 21st. The purpose of this survey was to have a look at the plant community in the fall and note the effects of the season's treatments. The protocol for the survey is the same in the fall as it was in the spring survey with the exception of the diver which was not used in the fall. This season, an additional scan of the plant biovolume was made to assess the effectiveness of the treatment to reduce nuisance plant growth. Page 2 North Lake - Summary of Activities in 2014 2014 Control Efforts and Discussion Fragrant Water Lil)(Nymphaea odorata) and Yellow Flab Iris (Iris pseudacorusl The treatment of water lily and iris have been very aggressive at North Lake. Fragrant water lily has been all but eliminated except in the extreme north end of the lake. Nuphar (native) is still present and is starting to expand and reclaim areas once occupied by the invasive FWL. Areas of shoreline owned by residents have very little of the Yellow Flag Iris remaining at all. Most plants are growing in areas along the west shoreline and though treatments do take place there is very dense vegetation growing along the shoreline and in many areas is overgrowing the shore and blocking the entire shoreline. Efforts to eliminate fragrant water lily could accomplish this goal in the next couple seasons if control efforts continue. Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) Purple Loosestrife is a Class A noxious weed in Washington State and this designation means that its control is mandatory. Part of the county's task for surveying the lake is to .. P monitor where control is and isn't occurring and to notify the resident about control options or in some cases make applications themselves. There were two treatments at b North Lake for Purple Loosestrife and results seen at the time of the second application and .s the fall survey showed high levels of damage to the plants from the treatments. _ Larger known patches of loosestrife were treated especially hard this season. Two known large zones - one in the north end and = w the other in the south - have been treated Page 3 North Lake - Su_mma.ry of Activities in 2014 repeatedly and the areas are showing very good signs of control. Having grown to the plant densities they were at before treatments began means there is a good chance that viable seeds remain in the area and very close inspections will have to continue to monitor and eliminate new plants. Nuisance Weed Control In 2014, the residents living in the northeast corner of the north end "bay" of North Lake were commenting on the excessive growth of native plants in the near-shore zone. These plants were growing in a particularly shallow are and the growth was so dense that access to the lake with a canoe or paddleboat was not possible and recreation was severely impacted. For these reasons, an application was made to control this growth. A little over an acre was treated and the area treated is noted on the two BioBase scans included here. There was no scan from the 2014 spring survey so the June 2013 scan was used. i✓1 Merth 2014 Oq9 /Nw1h 2Rf4 dqur Eaw,t S!ieve!<ia} � eawrt S eve!iefal vravertr ''else ,. mcveM value - eteduy volume[�� 6afa.9 c vrzlum<[erre k7' volume{cn ft)L.e9 [h[•w.r!1 Ueulh 1AS evth fore:ft] Deuih(mea R) 7.96 [R(.,1.R) 44ae th fmhtfl) 0.1A sou rfa<c•em en fm1 width(m)rc` 13as7 ve 9ht lml <,aht(m) ,. rinMer{m) Sw.rSv The two more important numbers on these images are the Veg Avg BV (Average biovolume of the vegetation) and Veg PAC (Percent of the bottom that has plants growing). The numbers pertain to the only the area included in the polygon. Both showed a reduction - in the case of biovolume it was cut in at least half from 24% to 12%. The percentage of the bottom with plants (Veg PAC) did not decrease by a lot but that number includes a 1 foot tall plant in 9 feet of water - which regrowth following treatment may account for this. Though this data is Page 4 North Lake - Summary of Activities in 2014 good and useful, I feel the following two images without the polygon give a better picture of what probably occurred in the area and what was observed by the residents as well as personally during the fall survey. As a reminder, biovolume is the amount of the water column (in percent) that is occupied by plants. Sometimes this is described as "how tall the plants are" and is generally a fair description. In the images here, the colors denote the percentages with red indicating a higher percentage of the water column filled with plants and blue/green indicating very little or no plants at all. �e9etat: .4:18 PM CD • With that in mind, you can see how the areas in red from a June survey were scanned again October and were now only showing blue or green. Assuming that the growth of native plants were actually greater (worse) in later in the season than they would have been in June than the amount of clearing (areas now blue) was quite dramatic. Several residents made an effort to speak with us during the survey in October to mention how pleased they were with the results. Native Plant Community The overall plant community did not change significantly in North Lake in the opinion of the Surveyor. Najas continues to dominate the majority of the littoral area of the lake (area approximately 10 feet deep or less). Other pondweeds such as Whitestem and Largeleaf are also well represented, and Bladderwart continues to maintain a foothold in the extreme north and south ends of the lake. Some residents have expressed concern that the native lily species Nuphar is North Lake - Summary of Activities in 2014 ------------------------------------------------------ expanding rapidly in the lake. A map has been included which overlays the extent of Nuphar in 2013 with 2014. The pink edges would be showing this possible expansion. Though the nuphar has been increasing with the removal of the Fragrant Water Lily it does not appear to be growing at a rate to be concerned about. If control is desired in the future it can be completed easily with herbicides that will reduce the areas to more suitable areas. With the treatment of nuisance growth having occurred on North Lake for the first time, it will be important to track the native plant community closely to watch for shifts caused by any applications. Herbicides can affect different species differently and could influence the dominance of one species if care is not taken. For example, whitestem pondweed is seen as tolerant of some contact herbicides and if used for several years back to back in the same area can result in whitestem dominating the area and other species disappearing or becoming less abundant. Noteworthy Observations The LMD formed at North Lake renewed recently and when completed it meant that "Right of Entry" permissions had to be granted by the residents before their property could be accessed and treated for any noxious weeds. Several homes around the lake - for one reason or another - had not returned these forms to the City for the 2014 season and several areas with documented noxious weeds did not receive treatments. We have put together a map noting properties with permission forms returned granting access and those where no permission has been granted. This map also has all the locations with Purple Loosestrife present. Monitoring for new introductions of noxious weeds into North Lake is an important aspect of the surveys conducted each year. So far, no survey has turned up any NEW species but the risk is high with a plant like Curly leaf Pondweed already established in nearby lakes. This particular species is newly introduced to one nearby lake which means despite efforts to educate boaters, fishermen, paddlers and others noxious weeds are still being transported around. This plant has the reproductive potential to easily and rapidly colonize Page 6 North Lake - Summary of Activities in 2014 North Lake if introduced. It has a very high rate of seed production and like milfoil, easily reaches the water's surface and forms mats of vegetation. This vegetation often breaks off and washes up on the shoreline. Any plant which o PEWatvwr-«,e is spotted in the lake and looks new should be � - reported to the City or AquaTechnex directly for additional scrutiny. New introductions can be dealt with easier and with lower costs the sooner they are identified and efforts to control or eradicate them can begin. Please feel free to contact Adam Kleven by phone at 360-508-1276 or email at Adam@aquatechnex.com with any questions. Thank you for your time and consideration. gend y • Najas DominantmIM 4n- r Dominant ♦ y I • Whitestern Dominal • A • No Plants •i +O. „ ,h • • • r +� — — — - Created By: Feet .[moo 0 0 . 0 380 760 1,140 1,520 (ft@v"°p U*K W ° 00 0 Legend Chara Dominant Whitestern '• • --• Pondweed Dominant o � �ajas Dominant AL Ck e "'--`Yillll x • r a i i Created By: Feet o ° o oAquaTeChnex 0 180 360 720 1,080 1,440 ° "° ° 0 ends - Loosestrife ra � iwNx 49 r I � F ,a t�Vt irf . ° o e t Created B b Y� M , b eLst I I I w 1�iri 1 76Q;-s 1� 1,52 oo o 0 �r Loosestrife and Access Grantees ♦•iii�i�iiiii� N .❖:❖:�:•:�:❖:❖: ♦ III♦♦♦�i♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦•iiiii<iiiiiiiiii �•iiiiii� ♦•iiiiii'�•iiiiiiiii �•i•�•iiii� �� ♦•iiiiiii►iiiiiiiiii �•iiiiii� MA Own ♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•<•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•i •♦•♦•O•♦•♦•♦♦0•♦♦♦� , ♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦i�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦•♦♦♦•♦`�♦�♦�♦�♦� OAF ♦��♦♦♦�i♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦.►♦♦♦v♦♦1 ♦♦♦♦♦•IVA A♦•♦♦♦♦♦•♦♦♦ ♦ e�� •�•�•��•��•��♦♦♦ ♦♦� u♦♦�ail u MEN ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦�♦♦♦ ♦�♦ ♦♦Iii y i � . MA"MA WA A MWA �ISO jo �. .�;;.�.�.�.�.♦ +.!. Legend !♦;��♦�♦�♦i o Pu rpl e_L parcel AquaTechnex 0 yes liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilill u ,Y "1 1+ `w f r •b ~4 NORTH LAKE Management District 2015 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 IAVMP DEVELOPMENT AND ECOLOGY GRANT FUNDING............................................................................ 1 2.2 LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT.................................................................................................................... 1 2.3 THE AQUATIC WEED PROBLEM...................................................................................................................2 3.0 NPDFS AQUATIC PLANT&ALGAE PERMIT.....................................................................................2 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT...................................................................................3 5.0 2015 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES.........................................................................3 5.1 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-NOXIOUS PLANTS...................................................................................................3 ✓.J.i r r usi ung rr"tc' a'. Y................................................................................................................................. .. 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris..............................................................................................................•........................ 4 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife.............................................................................................................................•..... 4 5.2 HERBICIDE TREATMENTS.............................................................................................................................4 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment.............................................................................................................. 5 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris&Purple Loosestrife Treatment.................................................................................. 6 5.3 YFI AND PL MANUAL CONTROL.................................................................................................................. 6 J.`F `�v'A 1 ER I' ISLAND CON T RGL........................................................................................................ 6 5.5 WEED RAKES...............................................................................................................................................6 5.6 SYSTEMATIC SURVEY-NATIVE PLANTS..................................................................................................... 7 5.7 POST CONTROL VISUAL ASSESSMENT.......................................................................................................... 8 5.8 NATIVE GROWTH AND IMPACTS TO BENEFICIAL USES.................................................................................8 5.9 BLUE-GREEN AI.GAF.................................................................................................................................... 8 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING........................................................................................................9 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/PUBLIC EDUCATION............................................................................... 10 7.1 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT-............................................................................................................................. 10 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee(NLAC)...... ...................................................................................... 10 7.1.2 Development of 2015 Work Plan............_.................................................................-....................... 12 7.2 PUBLIC EDUCATION................................................................................................................................... 12 7.2.1 Newsletter........................................................................ ................................................................... 12 7.2.2 Public Notices...................................................................................................................................... 12 7.2.3 Educational Materials......................................................................................................................... 12 7.2.4 Web Page............................................................................................................................................. 13 7.2.5 Annual Report....................................................................................................................................... 13 8.0 2015 BUDGET REVIEW........................................................................................................................... 13 APPENDIX A,AQUATECHNEX REPORT:NORTH LAKE SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES IN 2015ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2015 FINAL REPORT TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. 2015 North Lake Water Quality Data............................ .... ..12. Table 2. 2015 North Lake LIVID Assessment Rates............................17 Table 3. 2015 North Lake Budget, Tasks 1 & 2..................... ............17 Table 4. 2015 North Lake Budget, Task 3........................................17 Table 5. 2015 North Lake Budget, Task 4........................................17 Table 6. 2015 North Lake Budget, Task 5........................................18 Table 7. 2015 North Lake LMD Budget Totals...................................18 Figure 1. North Lake Temperature, 2015....................................... ...11 Figure 2. North Lake DO, 2015.......................................................11 Author and Contact Information Hollie Shilley Water Quality Specialist City of Federal Way,Washington Public Works Department Division of Surface Water Management 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98063 (253) 835-2752 Hollie.shilley@cityoffederalway.com For more information contact: Public Works, phone(253) 835-2700. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2015 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by the North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) members and the entire lake community who contributed to the successful development of the North Lake Management District and the continued implementation of the aquatic plant management program. The Advisory Committee includes the following members: • Lake Residents: Chuck Gibson (Chair), Terry Thomas, Robin Cook, Mary McClellan- Aronen, and Brian Cleary • Weyerhaeuser Corporation: Samantha'Turner • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: Derek Hacker NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2015 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) and the Surface Water Management Division (SWM) successfully implemented the following goals as described in the 2015 work plan: • Identified and controlled noxious aquatic plants (purple loosestrife, yellow flag iris, and fragrant water lily). • A public education program was undertaken that continued to help prevent the introduction of noxious weeds,nuisance plants, and non-native animal species into the lake. • A comprehensive water quality monitoring program was implemented through the year to provide important data concerning the health of North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development and Ecology Grant Funding Prior to annexation into the City of Federal Way in 2005, North Lake was within the jurisdictional boundary of unincorporated King County. Leading up to annexation, the lake community had been implementing an informal aquatic plant management program for a number of years. But starting in 2004, a more formal effort was undertaken when North Lake began coordinating with King County in the development of an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP)—a comprehensive document that established all future goals and strategies for freshwater lake noxious weed management. Anticipating that North Lake would soon be annexed into the city, SWM staff began collaborating with King County to finalize of the North Lake IAVMP (a document required by the Washington Department of Ecology for future grant funding). Consequently,North Lake was awarded a four-year Washington State Department of Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund (AWMF) grant in 2005 with SWM designated as the administrator. The action plan outlined in the grant included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education designed to begin eradication of the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily,purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The grant budget totaled approximately$80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The AWMF grant expired December 31, 2009. 2.2 Lake Management District While the AWMF grant program was being implemented, city staff and residents began meeting with the intent to form a Lake Management District for North Lake as a means to provide a long- term funding mechanism. In 2010, a ten-year LMD was formed. Per RCW 36.61, annual NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 1 2015 FINAL REPORT assessments collected from LMD property owners funds the following programs: ongoing aquatic vegetation management, water quality monitoring, public education, and related lake improvement programs. 2.3 The Aquatic Weed Problem Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to the State of Washington. They are invasive and pose a serious threat to our state's waterbodies, including North Lake. Because noxious plants have few natural controls, spread rapidly, and out-compete native plant and animal habitats. The presence of noxious freshwater weeds can lead to a loss of recreational opportunities and may even lower values of lakefront properties(Ecology, 2005). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species.This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur; and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major noxious weed classifications are listed according to the seriousness of the threats posed to the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest pIn-uiity. Eradication is iegifireu Uy law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a county option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT In 2015, coverage for North Lake continued under the state of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit (permit) for the management of aquatic plants and algae. Permit issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Effective March 18, 2011, the five-year NPDES permit (issued under the authority of RCW 90.48) has been implemented by the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex, LLC. The permit governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The permit expires on March 18, 2016. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2 2015 FINAL REPORT 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT In 2015, AquaTechnex operated under the fourth year of a four-year Professional Services Agreement with the City of Federal Way. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides), post control surveys, mapping, reports, and attending meetings as required. In November the Advisory Committee approved an amended two year contract extension with AquaTechnex. 5.0 2015 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 5.1 Systematic Survey- Noxious Plants AquaTechnex completed the annual initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake on June 11, 2015. The survey consisted of transects being recorded at approximately 400-500 foot intervals around the shoreline, with rake-toss samples taken in a line perpendicular to the shoreline to determine the presence and abundance of the lake's aquatic plant species. During the effort, the survey team mapped all submerged, floating, and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex Report: North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2015.Native plant information is provided below in Section 5.6. Noxious weeds found during the 2015 North Lake initial systematic survey included: • Fragrant water lily, (Nymphaea odroata), Class C • Yellow flag iris, (Iris pseudacorus), Class C • Purple loosestrife, (Lythrum salicaria), Class A The following is a discussion regarding noxious weeds documented during the 2015 plant survey. 5.1.1 Fragrant Water Lily Fragrant water lily (FWL) is a familiar aquatic plant that commonly grows around lake margins. It is recognized by its fragrant (white, pink to purple in color) flowers that float on the water surface; and by its large, round, floating leaves that have distinctive slits on one side. Due to its attractiveness, this nonnative plant has been introduced to many lakes in Washington. Unfortunately, FWL is a noxious plant that can become invasive in lakes with extensive shallow areas such as North Lake (Ecology 2014). Therefore it is listed as a State of Washington Class C Weed. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 3 2015 FINAL REPORT The June survey documented very small patches of FWL growth in North Lake, which have significantly decreased over the years. Based on the survey results, the plant has been nearly eradicated. 5.1.2 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable along the edge of water and in wetlands. Its yellow-colored flowers bloom in late spring or early summer. This noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has a flower stalk that grows up to nearly five feet tall. Additionally, the rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude more desirable native wetland species. The June survey found sparse populations of YFI along the east shoreline where treatment has been very successful over the years. The undeveloped western shoreline is more difficult to access which hampers control efforts. Annual glyphosate treatment will continue with the goal of eradication of YFI. 5.1.3 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class A weed(Ecology,2014). Because the plant's seedlings tend to emerge from the lake sediments along the shorelines during the entire growing season, it has been necessary to perform multiple surveys through the summer to map PL locations. In 2015, this noxious emergent plant continues to be widely scattered along the western shorelines of the lake. Densities on the east side have decreased more dramatically over the years. The control action for PL involved several scheduled herbicide applications of triclopyr(Renovate3) on private property via permission(right of entry) from landowners. 5.2 Herbicide Treatments The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities in lakes, and the applicator must also comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Glyphosate Glyphosate (Rodeo) was used to treat FWL and YFI colonies on North Lake in 2015. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) for aquatic applications. With applications generally made in mid to late summer to maximize translocation of the herbicide down into the root system, glyphosate provides effective long-term control. Visible NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 4 2015 FINAL REPORT effects on most annual weeds occur within two to four days; seven days or more on most perennial weeds; and thirty days or more on most woody plants. However, extremely cool or cloudy weather following treatment may slow the activity of this product and delay visual effects of control. Visible effects of glyphosate treatment includes gradual wilting and yellowing of the plant, which then advances to complete browning of above-ground growth and deterioration of underground plant parts. The advantages of glyphosate include: • The product is a systemic herbicide which is effective in the removal of targeted plants with no impact to plants not treated. • Application can be conducted in a spot-treatment or isolated area fashion. • There are no water use restrictions. Triclop Triclopyr (Renovate 3) is a liquid aquatic herbicide labeled for control of submersed, emergent and floating plants in and around aquatic sites such as lakes. The active ingredient (triclopyr) rapidly enters through the targeted plant leaves and stems and interferes with the plant's metabolism. The aquatic herbicide impacts most dicot (broadleaf) plants, and has little to no impact on most monocots (grassy type species). It is highly effective in selectively targeting purple loosestrife and carries no restrictions on recreational use such as swimming and fishing in the treatment area. 5.2.1 Fragrant Water Lily Treatment All FWL colonies on the lake were targeted for eradication. The control plan was designed to achieve the following: • Allow for the gradual replacement of FWL with native vegetation to improve fish habitat. • Improve boater access and provide safer recreational opportunities. • Reduce the possibility of excessive amounts of dying vegetation (which contributes to an increase in nutrient loading that may result in more frequent algae blooms). ■ Limit the production of dead vegetation which reduces the likelihood for higher oxygen demand in the water column. The AquaTechnex Report: North Lake: Summary of Activities in 2015 contains maps locating FWL colonies. Glyphosate (Rodeo), a liquid, was applied directly on the lily pads by a two- person crew using boat-mounted low-pressure spray equipment. Two separate treatments took place in 2015. The aquatic herbicide (1.5 percent solution) and LI 700 surfactant were mixed in the spray tank and applied (by licensed applicators) uniformly over the lily pads within the designated treatment areas. This process included reapplication as necessary to areas that did not initially uptake enough herbicide because of weather or plant wash off. The total area treated equaled less than one acre. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 5 2015 FINAL REPORT 5.2.2 Yellow Flag Iris & Purple Loosestrife Treatment Continued eradication of all YFI and PL continued in 2015. In order to apply herbicide on private property, SWM staff obtained Temporary Rights of Entry from all participating property owners granting the city and its agents (AquaTechnex) access to complete treatments of these emergent plant species. In 2015, 82%of North Lake residents have granted access for emergent treatment. During treatment,AquaTechnex licensed applicators used glyphosate(Rodeo)for YFI and triclopyr (Renovate 3) for PL. The noxious weeds were sprayed from the lake-side off of a motorboat and from the land-side by licensed applicators using a backpack mounted unit. AquaTechnex personnel were careful not to impact adjacent ornamental plants or grasses during treatment activity. In accordance with state law, the King County Noxious Weed Control Board requires property owners to control purple loosestrife on private and public lands throughout the county (control means to prevent all seed production and to prevent the dispersal of all propagative parts capable of forming new plants). In 2015, both SWM and AquaTechnex continued coordinating with King County in the identification and control of PL on North Lake. Survey information is shared annually between each agency; this effort leads to a markedly improved identification program that allows for more effective treatment and control,therefore, a larger percentage of PL colonies can be eradicated. 5.3 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake themselves to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM provides information regarding proper manual control methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks), and the proper disposal of all organic debris(roots, seed heads, and stems) for both YFI and PL. 5.4 Water Lily Island Control Floating mud islands, resulting from past herbicide treatment of fragrant water lily colonies, are characterized by suspended masses of organic deposits (plant roots, peat and mud) that range in size from a few inches to a few feet thick. Gasses can build up from decomposing fibrous material and may lift the plant roots and parts of the lake bottom to the surface to form mud islands that can migrate from property-to-property. The NLAC agreed that floating mud island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. Although floating mud islands have been problematic in the past, none formed in 2015. 5.5 Weed Rakes In 2015, the weed rake loan program continued to provide North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain beneficial uses (fishing, boating and swimming) along private shorelines. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 6 2015 FINAL REPORT Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline(not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the WDFW Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet (publication#APF-1-98). Depending on the type of plant targeted, North Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. SWM staff take care each growing season to ensure proper use of weed rakes. For instance, if mifoil is present, the action of the rake may fragment the noxious plant and allow it to uncontrollably spread throughout the lake. Because neither milfoil nor any other submersed noxious aquatic plants were detected during the initial 2015 survey, weed rakes were able to be loaned out immediately to lake residents to control native aquatic plants when needed. The weed rake program was shut down for the season on September 15 pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW)Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 5.6 Systematic Survey— Native Plants The objective of the systematic survey is to quantify the presence and location of all aquatic plant vegetation (native and non-native) on North Lake. Detailed survey information and mapping may be found in the AquaTechnex Report: North Lake:Management Review-2015. In addition to the noxious species identified and discussed in Section 5.1, the following information details the most prevalent native plant species currently populating North Lake: Emergent Plants Scattered along the shoreline in moderate to dense patches are a number of emergent species that grow in the shallow margins of the lake: Typha spp. (Cattail) and Scirpus spp. (Bull Rush). The seeds of the rushes are an important food for waterfowl and mammals. Cattail rhizomes and their basal portions are a food source for geese and provide habitat for amphibians and fish. Additionally, all of North Lake's emergent vegetation helps to stabilize shorelines and reduce erosion. bloating Plants Nuphar spp. (Yellow pond lily) is a perennial waterlily plant that can form extensive stands in the shallow waters of lakes and ponds. It is a food source for mammals and waterfowl and provides spawning habitat for fish. With the clearing of the noxious white water lily, the native Nuphar population has been able to expand. Submersed Plants Najas sp. (Water nymph) is an annual aquatic plant that dominates the lake bottom. Unlike most other perennial aquatic plants, it reproduces from seed each year. This aquatic plant generally grows rapidly in the spring and produces seeds that drop into the lake sediments. Over time, a substantial seed bank may develop that can expand the weed population to the point of excluding other native plants. However, the recent expansion of yellow pond lily is providing shade and beginning to balance out the dominance of Najas that the lake has experienced the last few years. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 2015 FINAL REPORT Other submerged plant species observed in North Lake included: • Potamogeton praelongus (White stemmed pondweed). This native member of the pondweed family occurs in small clumps and was observed throughout the deeper littoral lake zones. + Elodea, a native plant that acts as an under story or secondary plant in the lake. • Chara (Muskgrass), a macro algae that is generally considered very beneficial. In most cases, this plant is low growing and occupies space on the lake bottom without posing a weed problem to lake users. 5.7 Post Control Visual Assessment During the Second Systematic Survey on September 24, AquaTechnex personnel performed a visual assessment to determine the effectiveness of the herbicide treatments and control methods conducted in 2015 on the three targeted noxious species (FWL, PL, and YFI). All targeted plants showed clear symptoms of herbicide damage. Surviving stands of YFI and PL were primarily located in areas that were difficult to access. 5.8 Native Growth and Impacts to Beneficial Uses The native plant community in North Lake has a level of diversity common for the lakes in this area. Additionally, the community exhibits a relative dominance of one species over all others: Najas flexilis. This plant is native to Washington but has the ability to grow to nuisance levels in an urban lake environment like North Lake. In recent summers, a small number of residents have complained about excessive Najas growth—an observation that is most probably linked to recently warmer spring and summers. The resulting extended growing season causes plant growth to peak towards the beginning of August, and increasing plant densities observed well into September. When aquatic plant growth is excessive, it may impair beneficial uses for lake residents—for example, impairment to recreational activities (boating, fishing and swimming). In August, AquaTechnex biologists reported that the density of the submerged aquatic plant Najas was high enough in three distinct areas to potentially adversely impact the beneficial uses of North Lake (one '/2 acre location on the north end of the lake, a 1 acre area around the east hook, and a 2 acre stretch along the southeast shore). Consequently the contractor proposed that this location be treated with the contact herbicide Diquat dibromide. On August 17, the North Lake Advisory Committee approved herbicide treatments in select nuisance areas identified by AquaTechnex. 5.9 Blue-Green Algae Blue-Green algae (cyanobacteria) are common in freshwater lakes, and they frequently form dense populations (blooms) in eutrophic (nutrient rich) waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are: light, temperature, pH, and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous). NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 8 2015 FINAL REPORT Blue-green blooms can pose a human health concern. Although most are non-toxic, some blue- green algae produce nerve or liver toxins. Toxicity is difficult to predict because a single species of algae can produce both toxic and non-toxic strains. Additionally, a bloom that tests non-toxic one day can turn toxic the next day. People may become ill after coming into contact with lake waters that are impacted with toxic blue-green algae. Humans may experience stomach pains, vomiting, diarrhea, and skin rashes; and nerve and liver damage have been observed following long-term exposure(such as drinking impacted water). Although pets and wildlife have died after exposure to toxic blue-green algae in Washington lakes, there have been no confirmed human deaths reported worldwide(Ecology, 2014). There was a report of blue-green algae bloom in North Lake in August.Tests confirmed that toxin levels were below levels of concern established by the Washington State Health Department. 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING The King County Lake Stewardship Program Volunteer Monitoring Program for North Lake began in the 1980s and continued for several decades until budget cuts ended the program in 2005. Although the most recent data generated by this program (nine years prior to the date of this report) indicated that North Lake had been relatively low in primary productivity(borderline oligotrophic to mesotrophic) with very good water quality, a significant data gap exists between then and now. The long-term objectives of the current North Lake Management District Water Quality Monitoring Program include: (1) continuation of the gathering of baseline data with the intent of assessing long-term trends; (2) defining seasonal and water column variability; (3) identifying potential problems, proposing possible management solutions when feasible, or pinpointing additional studies to be made; and (4) educating lake residents, lake users, and policy makers regarding lake water quality. Monitoring this year began in early summer, with samples collected from the surface and one meter above the bottom from the deepest part of the lake to define changes found in the vertical profiles of the parameters. These data will not be useful to assess water quality trends and the ecology of North Lake until several years-worth have been collected. Data are currently being posted on the King County Small Lakes Data website: http:f/green2.kingcounty._gov/SmaIlLakes/W©Data.aspx NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9 2015 FINAL REPORT 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/PUBLIC EDUCATION Public involvement and public education for North Lake incorporates elements and concepts presented in the 2004 Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). Using the IAVMP, the annual Work Plan strives to improve lake health through the promotion of lake stewardship and through the implementation of educational programs designed to help lake residents and lake users detect and prevent the spread of noxious aquatic plant species. 7.1 Public Involvement The North Lake Public Involvement program for 2015 included the following: 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) The NLAC is charged with setting lake management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. Resolution No. 09-560, passed by the City Council, created the Advisory Committee for North Lake LMD Number 2. Tlie purpose of the 1Ni AC -1S- to sto provide for LMD property owner representation to the City Council. Per Resolution No. 09-560,NLAC representation consists of: • Five (5) representing single family and/or vacant properties; one (1) representing Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (public boat launch property); and one (1) representing the Weyerhaeuser Corporation. Currently,the term for property owners is two years.The 2015 NLAC members were: Member ` Representing Term Expiration Chuck Gibson Committee Chair,Lake Resident March 15,2016,Second Term Terry Thomas Lake Resident March 15,2016,Second Term Robin Cook Lake Resident March 15,2016,Second Term Mary McClellan-Aronen Lake Resident March 15,2016,First Term Brian Cleary Lake Resident March 15,2016,First Term Samantha Turner Weyerhaeuser N/A Derek Hacker Washington Department of Fish& N/A Wildlife NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 10 2015 FINAL REPORT The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities and duties of the NLAC: • Assists in the development of an annual lake management Work Plan and budget. • Participates in evaluation of aquatic plant control activities and helps to recommend annual control strategies. • Participates in other community involvement/education strategies efforts as needed. The NLAC met formally four times in 2015: February 9 • WDFW presentation • Habitat discussion • 2014 Nuisance plant treatment • 2014 Budget approval • 2015 Work plan approval • 2015 Water quality monitoring program May 5 • Nuisance plant control information • Water quality monitoring • Right of entry permission • Opening day of boating season is Draft Lakeview August 17 • Plant survey results • Nuisance native treatment • Algae blooms • AquaTechnex contract November 10 • Dan's departure • Annual report • 2016 Work plan • Extension of AquaTechnex's contract • Advisory Committee recruitment The minutes for each meeting may be accessed through the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 11 2015 FINAL REPORT 7.1.2 Development of 2015 Work Plan The goals and budget regarding the 2015 Work Plan are based upon Resolution Number 09-544 to form North Lake Management District Number 2. The following is a brief outline of the 2015 Work Plan approved by the NLAC: Task 1 &2: Aquatic Vegetation Control and'Freatment: Identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted noxious aquatic plant species. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the stated goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 6.0. Task 3: Public Education: Describes public involvement and public education elements designed to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of noxious aquatic weeds and the presence of non-native species in North Lake. Items in Task 2 may include: community meetings and Plant ID Workshop, quarterly newsletter(The Lakeview), boater outreach program, printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases, web site development, and development of an annual report. Tack 4: Water Qnalily Monitoring: Describes the water quality sampling plan designed to measure and track the health of North Lake. 7.2 Public Education The North Lake public education program for 2015 involved a combination of the following: quarterly newsletter,public notices, and educational materials. 7.2.1 Newsletter SWM staff issued the publication, The Lakeview, quarterly to all North Lake residents in 2015 via US Postal Service and through the city's email subscribe list. The newsletter (created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee), includes updates to lake residents concerning recent LMD activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 7.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. All NLAC meetings were advertised on the city's Calendar of Events web page. 7.2.3 Educational Materials SWM staff continued to develop and issue the following lake-related informational flyers and brochures as needed: • Milfoil Boater Education • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 12 2015 FINAL REPORT • Aquatic Weed Rake Program • Be Lake Steward • Permanent signage at the public boat launch 7.2.4 Web Page In 2015, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. The content of the information was kept up-to-date through the year. Web site information includes: • AquaTechnex Report: North Lake: Management Review-2015 • Right of Entry form • Advisory Committee Application • The Lakeview 7.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a North Lake LMD final year-end report that describes all significant LMD program information and activities. 8.0 2015 BUDGET REVIEW The information provided below consists of task-by-task work plan goals/scope of work and their associated expenditures for 2015. TASK 1 &2 Aquatic Vegetation Control/Treatment Date Object Code Reference# Vendor Description Cost 1/1/15 411 N/A AquaTechnex Permit fee $496.00 2/16/15 411 5441 AquaTechnex Attendance NLAC Meeting $265.00 6/25/15 411 5822 AquaTechnex Initial Survey $821.25 7/27/15 411 5984 AquaTechnex Treatment Notifications $383.25 7/27/15 411 5984 AquaTechnex Mobilization Fee $328.50 7/27/15 411 5984 AquaTechnex Shoreline Posting $82.13 7/27/15 411 5984 AquaTechnex Treatment of PL(4hrs) $657.00 8/24/15 411 6120 AquaTechnex Attendance NLAC Meeting $290.18 8/24/15 411 6120 AquaTechnex Mobilization Fee $328.50 8/24/15 411 6120 AquaTechnex Shoreline Posting $164.25 8/24/15 411 6120 AquaTechnex Treatment Native Nuisance Vegetation $1,149.75 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 13 2015 FINAL REPORT 8/24/15 411 6120 AquaTechnex Treatment of PL(2hrs) $328.50 10/12/15 411 6236 AquaTechnex Post Survey $574.88 11/2/15 411 6276 AquaTechnex Report Generation $492.75 11/24/15 411 6320 AquaTechnex Report Generation $821.25 $7,183.19 TASK 3.Public Education Object Date Code Reference# Vendor Description Cost 02/09/15 492 N/A Petty cash NLAC meeting $5.99 05/05/15 492 N/A Petty cash NLAC meeting $7.49 08/03/15 492 N/A Pettv cash NLAC meetinq $5.49 08/17/15 492 N/A Petty cash NLAC meeting $5.00 03/25/15 492 57602 Print solutions Newsletter $170.23 05/20/15 492 58745 Print solutions Newsletter $170.23 09/04/15 492 60912 Print solutions Newsletter $168.98 11/06/15 492 62283 Print solutions Newsletter $170.23 $703.64 TASK 4.Water Quality Monitoring Date Object Code Reference# Vendor Description Cost 06/11/15 410 61607 King County lab Sample Analysis $300.00 08/10/15 410 64242a King County lab Sample Analysis $1,417.50 .........--- - 10/08/15 410 67280 King County lab Sample Analysis $1,417.50 10/22/015 410 68207a King County lab Sample Analysis $367.50 ..............._........... _.. 12/03/15 ��41 0 70229a King County lab Sample Analysis $367.50 12/03/15 0 70115a King County lab Sample Analysis $367.50 $4,237.50 TASK 5.SWM-implemented LMD Efforts Date Object Reference# Vendor Description Cost Code Annual 110 N/A SWM Staff Annual efforts,2015 $3,781.6: NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 14 2015 FINAL REPORT 2015 NORTH LAKE LMD BUDGET TOTALS 2014 LIVID Balance Carried Forward $5,322.00 2015 LIVID Assessments Collected (includes interest) $13,550.73 TOTAL 2015 REVENUE $18,872.73 TOTAL 2015 EXPENSES $15,905.96 Estimated Final 2015LMD Fund Balance $2,967 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 15 2015 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 16 2015 FINAL REPORT NORTH LAKE Management District 2016 Final Report Prepared by: City of Federal Way Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2016 FINAL REPORT TABLES Table 1. 2016 North Lake Water Quality Data Table 2. 2016 North Lake LMD Assessment Rates Author and Contact Information Mindi English Water Quality Program Coordinator City of Federal Way, Washington Public Works Department Division of Surface Water Management 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98063 (253) 835-2756 Mindi.english@cityoffe deralway.com For more information contact: Public Works,phone (253) 835-2700. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2016 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided by the North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) members and the entire lake community who contributed to the successful development of the North Lake Management District and the continued implementation of the aquatic plant management program. The Advisory Committee includes the following members: • Lake Residents: Terry Thomas (Chair), Mary McClellan-Aronen, and Brian Cleary • IRG Corporation: Tom Messmer • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: David Heimer NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2016 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) and the Surface Water Management Division (SWM) successfully implemented the following goals as described in the 2016 work plan: • Identified and controlled noxious aquatic plants (purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris). • A public education program was undertaken that continued to help prevent the introduction of noxious weeds,nuisance plants, and non-native animal species into the lake. • A comprehensive water quality monitoring program was implemented through the year to provide important data concerning the health of North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development and Ecology Grant Funding Prior to annexation into the City of Federal Way in 2005, North Lake was within the jurisdictional boundary of unincorporated King County. Leading up to annexation, the lake community had been implementing an informal aquatic plant management program for a number of years. But starting in 2004, a more formal effort was undertaken when North Lake began coordinating with King County in the development of an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP)—a comprehensive document that established all future goals and strategies for freshwater lake noxious weed management. Anticipating that North Lake would soon be annexed into the city, SWM staff began collaborating with King County to finalize of the North Lake IAVMP (a document required by the Washington Department of Ecology for future grant funding). Consequently,North Lake was awarded a four-year Washington State Department of Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund (AWMF) grant in 2005 with SWM designated as the administrator. The action plan outlined in the grant included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education designed to begin eradication of the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water Illy, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The grant budget totaled approximately$80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The AWMF grant expired December 31, 2009. 2.2 Lake Management District While the AWMF grant program was being implemented, city staff and residents began meeting with the intent to form a Lake Management District for North Lake as a means to provide a long- term funding mechanism. In 2010, a ten-year LMD was formed. Per RCW 36.61, annual assessments collected from LMD property owners funds the following programs: ongoing NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 1 2016 FINAL REPORT aquatic vegetation management, water quality monitoring, public education, and related lake improvement programs. 2.3 The Aquatic Weed Issue Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to the State of Washington. They are invasive and pose a serious threat to our state's waterbodies, including North Lake. Because noxious plants have few natural controls, spread rapidly, and out-compete native plant and animal habitats. The presence of noxious freshwater weeds can lead to a loss of recreational opportunities and may even lower values of lakefront properties (Ecology, 2005). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on the stage of invasion of each species. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur; and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major noxious weed classifications are listed according to the seriousness of the threats posed to the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet wide-spread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a county option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT In 2016, coverage for North Lake continued under the state of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit (permit) (Permit Number WAG994094) for the management of aquatic plants and algae. Permit issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Effective April 1, 2016, the five-year NPDES permit (issued under the authority of RCW 90.48) has been implemented by the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex, LLC. The permit governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The permit expires on March 31, 2021. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2 2016 FINAL REPORT 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT In 2016, AquaTechnex operated under the first year of a four-year Professional Services Agreement with the City of Federal Way. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides), post control surveys,mapping,reports, and attending meetings as required. 5.0 2016 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 5.1 Systematic Survey— Noxious Plants AquaTechnex completed the annual initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake on June 15 and 16, 2016. The survey consisted of transects being recorded at approximately 400-500 foot intervals around the shoreline, with rake-toss samples taken in a line perpendicular to the shoreline to determine the presence and abundance of the lake's aquatic plant species. During the effort, the survey team mapped all submerged, floating, and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver also performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex Report: North Lake Letter Report June 2016 Survey.Native plant information is provided below in Section 5.6. Noxious weeds found during the 2016 North Lake initial systematic survey included: • Yellow flag iris, (Iris pseudacorus), Class C • Purple loosestrife, (Lythrum salicaria), Class B The following is a discussion regarding noxious weeds documented during the 2016 plant survey. 5.1.1 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris (YFI) is unmistakable along the edge of water and in wetlands. Its yellow-colored flowers bloom in late spring or early summer. This noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has a flower stalk that grows up to nearly five feet tall. Additionally, the rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude more desirable native wetland species. 5.1.2 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife (PL) has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 3 2016 FINAL REPORT shallow water and wet soil. PL is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class A weed(Ecology, 2014). Purple Loosestrife continues to grow along the water's edge. Through it can be found around much of the lake the highest plant densities can be found along the west shoreline where it is largely undeveloped. An additional survey effort was made in conjunction with King County to locate all the Loosestrife plants. 5.2 Herbicide Treatments The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities in lakes, and the applicator must also comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. Currently waiting for additional information from Aquatechnex on status of treatment for 2016 5.3 YFI and PL Manual Control The North Lake aquatic weed management program utilizes public education materials to inform lake residents about effective manual removal efforts they may undertake themselves to help control the spread of both YFI and PL. SWM provides information regarding proper manual control methods (digging up the roots or cutting back the stalks), and the proper disposal of all organic debris (roots, seed heads, and stems) for both YFI and PL. 5.4 Water Lily Island Control Floating mud islands, resulting from past herbicide treatment of fragrant water lily colonies, are characterized by suspended masses of organic deposits (plant roots, peat and mud) that range in size from a few inches to a few feet thick. Gasses can build up from decomposing fibrous material and may lift the plant roots and parts of the lake bottom to the surface to form mud islands that can migrate from property-to-property. The NLAC agreed that floating mud island removal action would continue to be implemented on an as-needed basis if floating masses interfered with the beneficial uses of the lake. Although floating mud islands have been problematic in the past, none formed in 2016. 5.5 Weed Rakes In 2016, the weed rake loan program continued to provide North Lake residents an opportunity to borrow rakes that are designed especially for the control of native aquatic vegetation. The rakes were used as necessary through the summer to maintain beneficial uses (fishing, boating and swimming) along private shorelines. Weed rakes can only be used to the minimum extent necessary to maintain beneficial use of the shoreline (not to exceed the maximum length of ten linear feet), as specified in the"FW Aquatic NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 4 2016 FINAL REPORT Plants and Fish pamphlet (publication 4APF-1-98). Depending on the type of plant targeted,North Lake residents were able to control native aquatic plants using two different styles of rakes: a rake with a sharp cutting blade for submerged vegetation, and a rake with large tines for control of floating or slightly submerged plants. SWM staff take care each growing season to ensure proper use of weed rakes. For instance, if milfoil is present, the action of the rake may fragment the noxious plant and allow it to uncontrollably spread throughout the lake. Because neither milfoil nor any other submersed noxious aquatic plants were detected during the initial 2015 survey, weed rakes were able to be loaned out immediately to lake residents to control native aquatic plants when needed. The weed rake program was shut down for the season on September 15 pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)Aquatic Plants and Fish pamphlet requirements. 5.6 Systematic Survey— Native Plants The objective of the systematic survey is to quantify the presence and location of all aquatic plant vegetation (native and non-native) on North Lake. Due to staffing issues, detailed survey information will be available at a later date from Aquatechnex. 5.8 Native Growth and Impacts to Beneficial Uses The native plant community in North Lake has a level of diversity common for the lakes in this area. Additionally, the community exhibits a relative dominance of one species over all others: Najas flexilis. This plant is native to Washington but has the ability to grow to nuisance levels in an urban lake environment like North Lake. In recent summers, a small number of residents have complained about excessive Najas growth—an observation that is most probably linked to recently warmer spring and summers. The resulting extended growing season causes plant growth to peak towards the beginning of August, and increasing plant densities observed well into September. When aquatic plant growth is excessive, it may impair beneficial uses for lake residents—for example, impairment to recreational activities (boating, fishing and swimming). 5.9 Blue-Green Algae Blue-Green algae (cyanobacteria) are common in freshwater lakes, and they frequently form dense populations (blooms) in eutrophic (nutrient rich) waters. The main factors that may determine the development of algae blooms are: light, temperature, pH, and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous). Blue-green blooms can pose a human health concern. Although most are non-toxic, some blue- green algae produce nerve or liver toxins. Toxicity is difficult to predict because a single species of algae can produce both toxic and non-toxic strains. Additionally, a bloom that tests non-toxic one day can turn toxic the next day. People may become ill after coming into contact with lake waters that are impacted with toxic blue-green algae. Humans may experience stomach pains, vomiting, diarrhea, and skin rashes; and nerve and liver damage have been observed following long-term exposure (such as drinking impacted water). Although pets and wildlife have died after exposure to toxic blue-green algae in Washington lakes, there have been no confirmed human deaths reported worldwide (Ecology, 2014). NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 5 2016 FINAL REPORT There were no reports of blue-green algae blooms in North Lake during 2016. 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING The King County Lake Stewardship Program Volunteer Monitoring Program for North Lake began in the 1980s and continued for several decades until budget cuts ended the program in 2005. Although the most recent data generated by this program (nine years prior to the date of this report) indicated that North Lake had been relatively low in primary productivity(borderline oligotrophic to mesotrophic) with very good water quality, a significant data gap exists between then and now. The long-term objectives of the current North Lake Management District Water Quality Monitoring Program include: (1) continuation of the gathering of baseline data with the intent of assessing long-term trends; (2) defining seasonal and water column variability; (3) identifying potential problems, proposing possible management solutions when feasible, or pinpointing additional studies to be made; and (4) educating lake residents, lake users, and policy makers regarding lake water quality. Monitoring this year began in early summer, with samples collected from the surface and one meter above the bottom from the deepest part of the lake to define changes found in the vertical profiles of the parameters. These data will not be useful to assess water quality trends and the ecology of North Lake until several years-worth have been collected. Data are currently being posted on the King County Small Lakes Data website: http://,qreen2.kingcounty.qov/SmalILakes/WQData.aspx 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/PUBLIC EDUCATION Public involvement and public education for North Lake incorporates elements and concepts presented in the 2004 Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). Using the IAVMP, the annual Work Plan strives to improve lake health through the promotion of lake stewardship and through the implementation of educational programs designed to help lake residents and lake users detect and prevent the spread of noxious aquatic plant species. 7.1 Public Involvement The North Lake Public Involvement program for 2016 included the following: 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) The NLAC is charged with setting lake management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. Resolution No. 09-560, passed by the City Council, NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 6 2016 FINAL REPORT created the Advisory Committee for North Lake LMD Number 2. The purpose of the NLAC is to provide for LMD property owner representation to the City Council. Per Resolution No. 09-560,NLAC representation consists of. • Five (5) representing single family and/or vacant properties; one (1) representing Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (public boat launch property); and one (1) representing IRG,who purchased the former Weyerhauser property. Currently, the term for property owners is two years. The 2016 NLAC members were: Member Representing Term Expiration Terry Thomas Committee Chair, Lake Resident March 15,2016,Second Term Mary McClellan-Aronen Lake Resident March 15,2016, First Term Brian Cleary Lake Resident March 15,2016, First Term Vacant Lake Resident N/A Vacant Lake Resident N/A Tom Messmer IRG N/A David Heimer Washington Department of Fish& N/A Wildlife The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities and duties of the NLAC: • Assists in the development of an annual lake management Work Plan and budget. • Participates in evaluation of aquatic plant control activities and helps to recommend annual control strategies. • Participates in other community involvement/education strategies efforts as needed. The NLAC met formally five times in 2016: March 29 • Introduction of Mindi English,new Water Quality Program Coordinator • Committee orientation and training • 2015 Budget approval • 2016 Work plan approval June 15 • UW Presentation regarding arsenic in local lakes NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 2016 FINAL REPORT • Chair Chuck Gibson leaving committee and looking for a replacement • Surveys completed June 9th and 10th • Darren Nash will be taking over water quality monitoring program from Chuck Gibson August 19 Special Meeting Purpose of the meeting was to discuss resident concerns with water quality in North Lake if the proposed Orca Bay fish processing plant was approved. August 22 • Summarize special meeting from Aug. 19 • Aquatechnex treated North Lake on Aug. 18, 2017. An area of fragrant white water lilies is growing and needs to be treated. • Residents are encouraged to check out weed rakes. No specific areas of native growth were targeted for treatment. • Committee has two(2) open positions • Darren Nash is conducting water quality monitoring • Presentation from UW on their crawfish study January 11,2017 (due to schedules, the 4th quarter meeting was held during Jan. 2017) • City Council Interviews for 2 vacant positons on committee scheduled for January 17, 2017 • The following plant species were observed in North Lake during surveys: Najas, Naiad, Bladderwort, Large Leaf Pondweed and Chara. Purple loosestrife is still growing along the west shoreline. • Reviewed draft budget and workplan. Final will be presented at March meeting. • Staff presented a grant opportunity from Dept. of Ecology that is available to LMDs. Committee can discuss at future meetings as applications are due in October. • Mindi presented graphs of water quality trends from 2015 and 2016 The minutes for each meeting will be added to the SWM web page devoted to North Lake publications. 7.1.2 Development of 2016 Work Plan The goals and budget regarding the 2016 Work Plan are based upon Resolution Number 09-544 to form North Lake Management District Number 2. The following is a brief outline of the 2016 Work Plan approved by the NLAC: Task 1 & 2:Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment: Identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted noxious aquatic plant species. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the stated goals. A detailed description of Task 1 may be found in Section 6.0. Task 3: Public Education: Describes public involvement and public education elements designed to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of noxious aquatic weeds and the presence of non-native species in North Lake. Items in Task 2 may include: community meetings and Plant ID Workshop, quarterly newsletter(The Lakeview), boater outreach program, NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 8 2016 FINAL REPORT printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases, web site development, and development of an annual report. Task 4: Water Quality Monitoring: Describes the water quality sampling plan designed to measure and track the health of North Lake. 7.2 Public Education The North Lake public education program for 2016 involved a combination of the following: quarterly newsletter,public notices, and educational materials. 7.2.1 Newsletter SWM staff issued the publication, The Lakeview, quarterly to all North Lake residents in 2016 via US Postal Service and through the city's email subscribe list. The newsletter (created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee), includes updates to lake residents concerning recent LMD activities, and education information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. 7.2.2 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. All NLAC meetings were advertised on the city's Calendar of Events web page. 7.2.3 Educational Materials SWM staff continued to develop and issue the following lake-related informational flyers and brochures as needed: • Milfoil Boater Education • Good Plants/Bad Plants • Purple Loosestrife Seed Head Removal • Four Reasons Not to Feed the Ducks or Geese • Aquatic Weed Rake Program • Be Lake Steward • Permanent signage at the public boat launch 7.2.4 Web Page In 2016, SWM staff continued providing a web page devoted to North Lake aquatic plant management activities. Web site information will be updated to include: • Right of Entry form • Advisory Committee Application • The Lakeview • Meeting minutes NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9 2016 FINAL REPORT • 2016 Annual Report 7.2.5 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a North Lake LMD final year-end report that describes all significant LMD program information and activities. 8.0 2016 BUDGET REVIEW The information provided below consists of task-by-task work plan goals/scope of work and their associated expenditures for 2016. TASK 1 &2 Aquatic Vegetation Control/Treatment Date Object Code Reference# Vendor Description Cost 3/30/16 411 6146 AquaTechnex $535.00 10/27/16 411 7275 AquaTechnex Aquatic Plant Mgmt $550.00 12/28/16 411 7423 AquaTechnex Aquatic Plant Mgmt $3,271.31 $4,356.31 TASK 3. Public Education Date Object Reference# Vendor Description Cost Code 4/7/16 492 N/A Petty cash NLAC meeting $3.98 4/14/16 492 N/A Print Solutions, Inc. Newsletter $170.38 7/14/16 492 N/A Print Solutions, Inc. Newsletter $169.29 11/14/16 492 N/A Print Solutions, Inc. Newsletter $170.23 $513.88 TASK 4.Water Quality Monitoring Date Object Reference# Vendor Description Cost Code 12/29/16 410 70115a King County lab Sample Analysis $1,812.57 $1,812.57 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 10 2016 FINAL REPORT TASK 5.SWM-implemented LMD Efforts Date Object Reference# Vendor Description Cost Code Annual 110 N/A SWM Staff Annual efforts,2016 $636.99 2016 NORTH LAKE LMD BUDGET TOTALS 2015 LMD Balance Carried Forward $2,122.85 2016 LMD Assessments Collected (includes interest) $12,696.81 TOTAL 2016 REVENUE $14,819.66 TOTAL 2016 EXPENSES $ 7,319.75 Estimated Final 2016LMD Fund Balance $7,499.91 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 11 2016 FINAL REPORT X� t + 7/14/2017 2017 - Surve and Control Summary Prepared by AquaTechnex, North Lake Management Review - 2017 North Lake Management Review - 2017 2017 - SURVEY AND CONTROL SUMMARY Introduction The residents of North Lake formed into a Lake Management District in an effort to proactively and collectively manage and care for the lake and its aquatic plant community in an effort to increase or maintain the beneficial uses of the lake. The management is aided by the City of Federal Way to help manage collected funds and maintain the direction chosen by the LMD. The main objective being to protect the water quality of North Lake and to monitor and control invasive weed growth in and around the lake. North Lake has a history of being impacted by noxious weeds. Fragrant Water Lily,Yellow Flag Iris,Purple Loosestrife, and Eurasian Milfoil have all been present in the past or are currently still persisting as a member of the plant community. Eurasianmilfoil was infesting the lake at one point, but a whole- lake application of Sonar herbicide eliminated the plant from the lake. The lake is surveyed twice annually and no additional milfoil has been located. AquaTechnex has been contracted to provide survey and aquatic plant management services at North Lake for several years. Our survey and control efforts in 2017 focused on the continued monitoring of noxious weed populations and control activities to reduce their presence. Additional focus is spent on assessing the native plant community and making any recommendations regarding native species control. The first application to control excessive native plant growth in North Lake took place in 2014. This report summarizes the operations at North Lake during 2017. North Lake Management Review - 2017 2017 Survey Summary The first survey of North Lake occurred on June 13th. There are several aspects of the survey completed and typically they are completed one at a time with a few trips around the lake. This allows the biologists and technicians to focus on each task separately and also increase their familiarity with the lake. The lake was surveyed by boat, and the entire lake was surveyed with the first pass of the lake taking the crew around the lake in the shallow, 6 feet deep or less area of the lake. This area is easily checked from the surface for milfoil and any other submerged noxious weed species which may have been introduced to the lake. Once this initial pass is completed the plant community is sampled with a series of rake-tosses to collect samples of the plants at given depth ranges throughout the lake. Transects running perpendicular from the shore were traveled and at the 5, 10, 15, and 20 foot depth contour a rake-toss sample was made. The species collected on the rake as well as the relative density of the species at that point were recorded. Native Plant Community The submerged plant community in North Lake appears to be in a stable pattern. Overall the species composition has not changed and no new introductions of plant species have occurred. With the clearing of the water lily in the lake the native plant Nuphar has been able to expand its range and has formed excellent areas of cover for fish species. One additional benefit of the expansion of this plant may be to balance out the dominance of Naiad in the lake by shading out its growth under the dense Nuphar pads and allowing other species the opportunity to become established. Page 2 North Lake Management Review - 2017 2017 Control Efforts and Discussion Fragrant Water Lily ftmphaea odorata) and Yellow Flab Iris (Iris pseudacorus) The treatment of water lily and iris have been very aggressive at North Lake. Fragrant water lily has been all but eliminated. Nuphar (native) is still present and is starting to expand and reclaim areas once occupied by the invasive FWL. Areas of shoreline owned by residents have very little of the Yellow Flag Iris remaining at all. Most plants are growing in areas along the west shoreline and though treatments do take place, there is very dense vegetation growing along the shoreline. Yellow Flag Iris will require treatment again this year. Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) Purple Loosestrife is a Class A noxious weed in Washington State and this designation means that its control is mandatory. Part of the county's task for surveying the lake is to monitor where control is and isn't occurring and to notify the resident about control options or in some cases make applications themselves. Treatment for loosestrife continued in 2016. All known loosestrife plants were treated and locations noted on a map included at the end of last year's report. Those same locations will be visited again this year as well as any additional locations that may be found. Please feel free to contact Travis Fuller by phone at 206-462-0608 or email at Travis@aquatechnex.com with any questions. Thank you for your time and consideration. Maps Map 1. Shows the locations of the rake-toss samples at North Lake. Map 2. Map showing the locations of the floating leaf plant species. Page 3 k A� r i , w � I 1 i 1 1 � °• I 1 « j / • P 1 o ... ` 14 ,. ''+''— • Irk , 4� r • r y e AALilAA1fN t A1• � 0 1 • • • yr M� 1 � � r • • �Ga 9, 1 F . a * . • i O � a • • • • • • • i • e • •i • '• • r , 1 N P e 1 P r M s .y , A d aK.mp I, P d p j4,� do a f i b t Porninant • Nuphar Patch8 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2018 Annual Report May 21 , 2019 Prepared by: Leah Myhre Kevin Du Water Quality Coordinator Water Quality Specialist Public Works Department Public Works Department City of Federal Way City of Federal Way Author and Contact Information Leah Myhre Water Quality Program Coordinator Surface Water Management Public Works Department City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way,WA 98063 (253) 835-2752 le�ilt.myhrc c%c ite;ofletienlIw� lv.c��n} For more information contact: Public Works at(253) 835-2700 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2018 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Federal Way acknowledges the significant contribution provided•by the North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) members and the entire lake community who contributed to the successful development of the North Lake Management District and the continued implementation of the aquatic plant management program. The Advisory Committee includes the following members: • Lake Residents: Terry Thomas (Chair), Lois Kutscha, Mary McClellan-Aronen, Darron Nash, and Larry Zimnisky • IRG Corporation: Tom Messmer(position filled after fall 2018 by Dana Ostenson) + Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: David Heimer NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2018 FINAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) and the Surface Water Management Division (SWM) successfully implemented the following goals as described in the 2018 work plan (Appendix D): • Identified noxious aquatic plants (purple loosestrife,yellow flag iris). • A public education program was undertaken that continued to help prevent the introduction of noxious weeds, nuisance plants, and non-native animal species into the lake. + A CO!llprehPilcive water quality monitoring progratr7 was irllple!neilied throughout file summer months to provide important data concerning the health of North Lake. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 IAVMP Development and Ecology Grant Funding Prior to annexation into the City of Federal Way in 2005, North Lake was within the jurisdictional boundary of unincorporated King County. Leading up to annexation, the lake community had been implementing an informal aquatic plant management program for a number of years. But starting in 2004, a more formal effort was undertaken when North Lake began coordinating with King County in the development of an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP)—a comprehensive document that established all future goals and strategies for freshwater lake noxious weed management. Anticipating that North Lake would soon be annexed into the city, SWM staff began collaborating with King County to finalize the North Lake IAVMP (a document required by the Washington Department of Ecology for future grant funding). Consequently, North Lake was awarded a four-year Washington State Department of Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund (AWMF) grant in 2005 with SWM designated as the administrator. The action plan outlined in the grant included a combined approach of annual surveys, treatment, control, and public education designed to begin eradication of the following noxious weeds: milfoil, fragrant water lily, purple loosestrife and yellow flag iris. The grant budget totaled approximately $80,000, with up to 75% of the eligible project costs reimbursed by Ecology. The AWMF grant expired December 31, 2009. 2.2 Lake Management District While the AWMF grant program was being implemented, city staff and residents began meeting with the intent to form a Lake Management District for North Lake as a means to provide a long- term funding mechanism. In 2010, a ten-year LMD was formed. Per RCW 36.61, annual assessments collected from LMD property owners fund the following programs: ongoing aquatic NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 1 2018 FINAL REPORT vegetation management, water quality monitoring, public education, and related lake improvement programs. 2.3 The Aquatic Weed Issue Noxious freshwater aquatic weeds are plants that are not native to the State of Washington. They are generally of limited distribution, invasive, and pose a serious threat to our state's waterbodies (including Steel Lake) if left unchecked. Because noxious plants have few natural controls in their new habitat, they spread rapidly, out-compete and effectively destroy native plant and animal habitats. This can lead to a degradation of water quality and recreational opportunities. In addition, the presence of noxious freshwater weeds may lower values of lakefront properties (Ecology, 2014). The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board classifies noxious weeds based on each species' stage of invasion. This classification system is designed to: (1) prevent small infestations from becoming large infestations; (2) contain already established infestations to regions of the state where they occur; and, (3) prevent their movement to un-infested areas of Washington. The following three major noxious weed classifications are listed according to the seriousness of the threats posed to the state: Class A Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in Washington. Preventing new infestations and eradicating existing infestations is the highest priority. Eradication is required by law. Class B Weeds: Non-native species presently limited to portions of the state. Species are designated for control in regions where they are not yet widespread. Preventing new infestations in these areas is a high priority. In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level, with containment as the primary goal. Class C Weeds: Non-native weeds found in Washington. Many of these species are widespread in the state. Long-term programs of suppression and control are a County option, depending upon local threats and the feasibility of control in local areas. 3.0 NPDES AQUATIC PLANT & ALGAE PERMIT In 2018, coverage for North Lake continued under the state of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit (permit) (Permit Number WAG994094) for the management of aquatic plants and algae. Permit issuance complies with state law and maintains the state's ability to regulate the use of herbicides in aquatic settings. Effective since April 1, 2016, the five-year NPDES permit (issued under the authority of RCW 90.48) has been implemented by the City's aquatic plant management contractor AquaTechnex, LLC. The permit governs activities such as: aquatic herbicide applications, residential postings/notifications, annual reporting, and records retention. The permit expires on March 31, 2021. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 2 2018 FINAL REPORT 4.0 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT CONTRACT In the spring of 2018, a new AquaTechnex Professional Services Agreement with the City of Federal Way was finalized, expiring December 31, 2022. The scope of the agreement includes: systematic aquatic plant surveys, implementation of control methods to target aquatic plants (diver hand pulling, hand cutting/raking, diver installation of bottom barriers, diver dredging, removal of floating water lily islands, treatment with Ecology-approved aquatic herbicides), post control surveys, mapping,reports, and attending meetings as required. 5.0 2018 AQUATIC WEED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 5.1 Systematic Survey — Noxious Plants AquaTechnex completed the annual initial systematic aquatic plant survey of North Lake on A....,,.,� 17 '�l114 !l„k. ., , nrn„rra� haranca the t11_j__1 I—- not fnr--- hid Th. cn YVP.I august � ,, 20 8. Only one survey occurred because ht_- r-�.r--- „_... .._._ --- id _ consisted of transects being recorded at approximately 400-500 foot intervals around the shoreline, with rake-toss samples taken in a line perpendicular to the shoreline to determine the presence and abundance of the lake's aquatic plant species. During the effort, the survey team mapped all submerged, floating, and emergent noxious weeds from a vessel (equipped with Global Positioning System [GPS] equipment), and recorded the location and extent of the plant communities discovered in and around the lake from the surface. A diver performed a more detailed underwater inspection of the littoral zone. The GPS information obtained in the field was later processed for map creation and analysis using ArcView GIS software. Plant location maps may be found in the AquaTechnex Report: North Lake Management Review - 2018, (Appendix A). Noxious weeds found during the 2018 North Lake systematic survey included: • Fragrant water lily(Nymphaea odorata) Class C • Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus), Class C • Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), Class B The following is a discussion regarding noxious weeds documented during the 2018 survey, as reported by AquaTechnex: 5.1.1 Yellow Flag Iris When flowering, yellow flag iris is unmistakable along the edge of water and in wetlands. Its yellow-colored flowers bloom in late spring or early summer. This noxious aquatic plant (State of Washington Class C Weed) has a flower stalk that grows up to nearly five feet tall. Additionally, the rhizomes of this nonnative plant spread to form dense stands that exclude more desirable native wetland species. Most of the yellow flag iris was found among the undeveloped western shoreline of the lake, and treatment is recommended in 2019. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 3 2018 FINAL REPORT 5.1.2 Purple Loosestrife Purple loosestrife has vivid purple-pink flowers and blooms in summer and early fall. This robust, square-stemmed noxious plant crowds out native wetland species to form dense stands in shallow water and wet soil. Purple Loosestrife is an invasive, rapidly-spreading European species that is a State of Washington Class B weed (Ecology,2014). Purple Loosestrife continues to grow along the water's edge. Through it can be found around much of the lake, the highest plant densities can be found along the west shoreline where it is largely undeveloped. An additional survey effort was made in conjunction with King County to locate all the Loosestrife plants, as controlling this noxious weed is state-mandated. 5.2 Herbicide Treatments The NPDES General Permit covers all noxious and quarantine-list weed control activities that discharge herbicides directly into surface waters of the state of Washington. Persons conducting herbicide applications must be covered by the General Permit for control activities in lakes, and the applicator must also comply with all herbicide label instructions and public notice procedures. No chemical treatment was performed by AquaTechnex in 2018. However, the Purple Loosestrife was treated by King County employees because the plant is a Class B noxious weed which means its control is mandatory. 5.3 Systematic Survey — Native Plants The objective of the systematic survey is to quantify the presence and location of all aquatic plant vegetation (native and non-native) on North Lake. According to AquaTechnex's annual report, "The submerged plant community in North Lake appears to be in a stable pattern. Overall the species composition has not changed and no new introductions of plant species have occurred. Naiad continues to be a dominant species in the plant community. In 2018, some patches of this species were found to be reaching the water surface. This was particularly prevalent in shallow areas around docks near the shoreline and in the southern area of the lake where depths stay shallow all the way across. At these levels, Naiad could be considered a nuisance species for North Lake homeowners." 5.4 Native Growth and Impacts to Beneficial Uses The native plant community in North Lake has a level of diversity common for the lakes in this area. Additionally, the community exhibits a relative dominance of one species over all others: Najas flexilis. This plant is native to Washington but has the ability to grow to nuisance levels in an urban lake environment like North Lake. In recent summers, a small number of residents have complained about excessive Najas growth—an observation that is most probably linked to recently warmer spring and summers. The resulting extended growing season causes plant growth to peak towards the beginning of August, and increasing plant densities observed well into September. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 4 2018 FINAL REPORT When aquatic plant growth is excessive, it may impair beneficial uses for lake residents—for example, impairment to recreational activities(boating, fishing and swimming). 5.5 Blue-Green Algae Blue-Green algae (cyanobacteria) are common in freshwater lakes, and they frequently form dense populations (blooms) in eutrophic (nutrient rich) waters. The main factors that may determine the, development of algae blooms are: light, temperature, pH, and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous). Blue-green blooms can pose a human health concern. Although most are non-toxic, some blue- green algae produce nerve or liver toxins. Toxicity is difficult to predict because a single species of algae can produce both toxic and non-toxic strains. Additionally, a bloom that tests non-toxic one day can turn toxic the next day. People may become ill after coming into contact with lake waters that are impacted with toxic blue-green algae. Humans may experience stomach pains, vomiting, diarrhea, and skin rashes; and nerve and liver damage have been observed following long-term exposure (such as drinking impacted water). Although pets and wildlife have died after exposure to toxic blue-green algae in Washington lakes, there have been no confirmed human deaths reported worldwide(Ecology, 2014). There was one report of blue-green algae on North Lake in August 2018, but an analysis by the King County Lab determined that it was non-toxic. 6.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING The King County Lake Stewardship Volunteer Monitoring Program for North Lake began in the 1980s and continued for several decades until budget cuts ended the program in 2005. Although the most recent data generated by this program (nine years prior to the date of this report) indicated that North Lake had been relatively low in primary productivity (borderline oligotrophic to mesotrophic) with very good water quality, a significant data gap exists between then and now. The long-term objectives of the current North Lake Management District Water Quality Monitoring Program include: (1) continuation of the gathering of baseline data with the intent of assessing long-term trends; (2) defining seasonal and water column variability; (3) identifying potential problems, proposing possible management solutions when feasible, or pinpointing additional studies to be made; and, (4) educating lake residents, lake users, and policy makers regarding lake water quality. Monitoring in 2018 began in early May,with samples collected from the surface and near-bottom depths from the deepest part of the lake to define changes found in the vertical profiles of the parameters. A total of six monitoring events took place over the summer months (May – October).North Lake data collected during 2018 can be found in Appendix B. Historical data can be found on the King County Lakes website: httl7:1./gr_e112.I in�<nElnty.�t��f15317aI1i, ii es!11'Ql��t i..i5l�r. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 5 2018 FINAL REPORT 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PUBLIC EDUCATION Public involvement and public education for North Lake incorporates elements and concepts presented in the 2004 Integrated Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP). Using the IAVMP, the annual Work Plan strives to improve lake health through the promotion of lake stewardship and through the implementation of educational programs designed to help lake residents and lake users detect and prevent the spread of noxious aquatic plant species. During the last quarterly meeting for 2018 the LMD committee took interest in the Lake Observations by Citizen Scientist & Satellites program funded by NASA with support from UNC, UW, and TTU. Lake level data submitted by citizen scientists is combined with lake surface area data from NASA satellites to determine how lake volumes evolve and respond to weather events overtime. The LMD committee plans to install the gauge in late spring/early summer 2019. 7.1 Public Involvement The North Lake Public Involvement program for 2018 included the following: 7.1.1 North Lake Advisory Committee (NLAC) The NLAC is charged with setting lake management priorities and providing input on the implementation of the annual Work Plan. Resolution No. 09-560, passed by the City Council in 2009, created the Advisory Committee for North Lake LMD Number 2. The purpose of the NLAC is to provide lakefront property owner representation for the LMD. Per Resolution No. 09-560,NLAC representation consists of. • Five (5) individuals representing single family and/or vacant properties; one (1) representing Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (public boat launch property); and one(1)representing IRG, who purchased the former Weyerhaeuser property. Currently, the term for property owners is two years. The 2018 NLAC members were: Member Representing Terry Thomas Committee Chair, Lake Resident Mary McClellan-Aronen Lake Resident Larry Zimnisky Lake Resident Lois Kutscha Lake Resident Darron Nash Lake Resident Tom Messmer/Dana Ostenson IRG David Heimer Washington Department of Fish& Wildlife NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 6 2018 FINAL REPORT The following outline includes,but is not limited to,the responsibilities and duties of the NLAC; • Assists in the development of an annual lake management Work Plan and budget; • Participates in evaluation of aquatic plant control activities and helps to recommend annual control strategies; and, • Participates in other community involvement/education strategies efforts as needed. The NLAC met three times in 2018. Full detailed meeting notes, agendas, and members who attended the meetings can be found in Appendix C. The following are brief topic abstracts from each NLAC meeting: April 4,2018 • Confirmed committee member's reappointment. • Discussed Aquatic Plant Treatment contract renewal. • North Lake LMD Renewal timeline. • Reviewed 2018 Work pian approvai. • Committee agreed to e-newsletter via email versus paper. Jure 28,2018 • Members observed suspicious activity including fires on IRG's property. • Finalized picnic date at Steel Lake Park. Implemented procedure to report algae blooms. • Reviewed the Lake View newsletter. • Attended presentation by Dr. Gawel of UW Tacoma on Asarco arsenic study in North Lake. November 19,2018 • Staffing updates: Mindi English left for a new position at the Department of Ecology, Leah Myhre became the new WQ Coordinator, and Kevin Du came onboard as the temporary water quality sampling and analysis assistant. • City of Federal Way Public Education & Outreach Coordinator presented on the Lake Observations by Citizen Scientist &Satellites program funded by NASA. Committee was interested in participating in the program. • Grant from AquaTechnex reviewed the 2018 Summary of Activities regarding aquatic plant management. • Discussed more strategic approach to geese management. • Review of work plan and current financials. • Review of North LMD renewal timeline. 7.1.2 Development of 2018 Work Plan The goals and budget regarding the 2018 Work Plan are based upon Resolution Number 09-544 that formed North Lake Management District Number 2. The following is a brief outline of the 2018 Work Plan approved by the NLAC: NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 7 2018 FINAL REPORT Task 1 &2:Aquatic Vegetation Control and Treatment: Identifies and describes the goals for effectively controlling and/or treating targeted noxious aquatic plant species. It also includes an estimate of all associated expenses necessary to accomplish the stated goals. Task 3: Public Education: Describes public involvement and public education elements designed to help inform lake residents and users about the impacts of noxious aquatic weeds and the presence of non-native species in North Lake. Items in Task 2 may include: community meetings and Plant ID Workshop, quarterly newsletter (The Lake View), boater outreach program, printing and distribution of educational flyers and press releases,web site development, and development of an annual report. Task 4: Water Quality Monitoring Describes the water quality sampling plan designed to measure and track the health of North Lake. Task 5: SWNI-Implemented 2018 LMD Efforts: Involves time invested by SWM personnel. A complete detailed Work Plan/Budget for 2018 can be found in Appendix D. 7.2 Public Education The North Lake public education program for 2018 involved a combination of the following: quarterly newsletter, public notices, and educational materials. 7.2.1 Newsletter SWM staff issued the publication, The Lake View, to all North Lake residents in August 2018 via the email list compiled by NLAC members. The newsletter (created jointly with the Steel Lake Advisory Committee), includes updates to lake residents concerning recent LMD activities, and educational information regarding lake stewardship and noxious weed management. The August newsletter focused on natural yard care, eco-friendly best practices for dock cleaning, and algae bloom awareness. 7.2.2 LMD Public Meeting/BBQ A community public meeting was held at Steel Lake Park on September 6, 2018 to provide LMD residents an opportunity to ask questions regarding the annual program. Approximately 30 lake residents attended the celebration. 7.2.3 Public Notices Notices were routinely provided to North Lake residents via email prior to contractor activities, including surveys and treatments. All NLAC meetings were advertised on the city's Calendar of Events web page. 7.2.4 Annual Report SWM staff develops and distributes a North Lake Management District final year-end report that describes all significant LMD program information and activities. NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 8 2018 FINAL REPORT 8.0 2018 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT YEAR END FINANCIALS 2018 2018 Work Plan Goals/Scope Estimated Expenditures (includes taxes) (includes taxes) TASK 1. Aquatic Vegetation Control/Treatment $12,000 $3,3b8.00 TASK 2. Public Education $1,035 $367.68 TASK 3. Hazardous Algae Bloom Management $500 $- TASK 4. Water Quality Monitoring $2,850 $2,676.00 TASK 5. Canada Geese Management $2,500 $- TASK B_ SWM-implemented LMD Efforts $2,500 $2,079.90 TOTAL 2018 EXPENSES $24,365 $8,491.58 2017 Carryover Balance $7,422.59 Total 2018 Budget: $20,135.70 2018 Assessment Revenue $12,713.11 2018 Expenditures $8,491.58 2018 Carryover Balance $11,644.12 NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9 2018 FINAL REPORT Appendix A NORTH LAKE MANAGEMENT REVIEW 2018 RIM Prepared by AquaTechnex, LLC. North Lake Management Review-2018 North Lake Management Review - 2018 207. 8 - SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT SUMMARY Introduction North Lake has a history of being impacted by noxious weeds. Fragrant Water car Lily, Yellow Flag Iris, Purple Loosestrife, and Eurasian Watermilfoil have all tenor, r-rnon i+ in +1-in nac+ nr aro i-nrran+w "garcictincr ac a mAmi-ior of+�a n]an+ community. Eurasian Watermilfoil was infesting the lake at one point, but a whole-lake application of Fluridone herbicide eliminated the plant from the lake. The lake is typically surveyed twice annually, and no additional milfoil has been located since. In 2018, only one survey was performed, as the City of Federal Way put the project out to bid and the contract with AquaTechnex was not finalized until mid-summer. AquaTechnex has been contracted to provide survey and aquatic plant management services at North Lake for several years. Our efforts in 2018 focused on the continued monitoring of noxious weed populations and control recommendations. Additional focus was spent on assessing the native plant community and making any recommendations regarding nuisance native species control. 2018 Survey Summary North Lake was surveyed on August 17th, 2018 by AquaTechnex. This survey followed the standard protocol that has been used in the past. The entire lake was surveyed by boat, with the first pass of the lake taking the crew around the lake in the shallow, 6 feet deep or less area of the lake. This area is easily checked from the surface for milfoil and any other submerged noxious weed Page 1 North Lake Management Review-2018 species which may have been introduced to the lake. Once this initial pass was completed, the plant community was sampled with a series of rake-tosses to identify plants at given depth ranges throughout the lake. Transects running perpendicular from the shore were traveled and at the 5, 10, and 15 foot depth contours a rake-toss sample was taken. The species collected on the rake as well as the relative density of the species at that point were recorded. Dominant species at each point were compiled in a map to show species composition of the lake. These results are shown in Map 1. at the end of this report. In addition to the data points taken, AquaTechnex also used sonar to scan for plant biomass density in the lake. This data was processed into a heat map which provides a visual representation of how much of the water column is taken up by plant biomass at any given point on the lake. This data is shown at the end of this report in Map 3. Native Plants The submerged plant community in North Lake appears to be in a stable pattern. Overall the species composition has not changed and no new introductions of plant species have occurred. Naiad continues to be a dominant species in the plant community. In 2018, some patches of this species were found to be reaching the water surface. This was particularly prevalent in shallow areas around docks near the shoreline and in the Southern area of the lake where depths stay shallow all the way across. At these levels, Naiad could be considered a nuisance species for North Lake homeowners. Fragrant Water Lily (Nymphaea odorata), Yellow Flag Iris (Iris pseudacorus), and Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) The treatment of water lily has been very aggressive in the past at North Lake. Previously, Fragrant water lily had been all but eliminated. However, 2018 saw an increase in the number of lily pads present on the lake. These locations can be seen in Map 2. The board decided against late season treatment in 2018 but it is highly recommended that we address this noxious species with chemical treatment in 2019. Typically it is best to spray this plant in August or September because the herbicides will be most effective at this time. Page 2 North lake Management Review- 201 R Areas of shoreline owned by residents have very little of the Yellow Flag Iris remaining at all. Most the plants remaining of this species are growing in areas along the west shoreline. No spraying for Yellow Flag Iris was done in 2018 but it is recommended in 2019. Purple Loosestrife is a Class B noxious weed in Washington State and this designation means that its control is mandatory. This plant was found to be present at several properties on North Lake in 2018. AquaTechnex did not treat these plants in 2018, however, King County employees did. AquaTechnex will continue to monitor this plant in 2019 and can perform foliar herbicide applications to control any remaining plants. 2019 Recommendations; For 2019, AquaTechnex recommends the continued surveying of North Lake for Eurasian Watermilfoil and any other submerged invasive plants. Continued monitoring of shoreline emergent invasive plants including Yellow Flag Iris and Purple Loosestrife is also advised. AquaTechnex recommends treatment of these species in 2019 as well as treatment of the invasive Fragrant Water Lily present on North Lake. This plant was present at greater levels in 2018 than other recent years and spraying in 2019 would help get his problem under control before it becomes any more pervasive in the lake. In addition to invasive plants, it is recommended that AquaTechnex continues to monitor the native plant community. In 2018, Naiad remained a dominant plant species which grew to nuisance levels in some areas. Though native plant communities are important to the overall health of the lake, spot treatment of dense plant patches could help improve the beneficial uses of the lake. Selecting areas for treatment would be at the discretion of North Lake homeowners and the City of Federal Way. Please feel free to contact Grant Bennett by phone at 360-508-1276 or email at Grant@aquatechnex.com with any questions. Thank you for your time and consideration. Page 3 North Lake Management Review-2018 Map 1. Dominant submerged plant species at 5, 10, and 15ft depth contours North Lake Submerged Species 8-17-2018 I 1� e Y Dominant Species ® Najas flexilis O Potamogeton�nae;ongils b Potamogeton amplifolius S Chara 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 Miles • • - • • • • 1 V r a i.y, 4^ iL lk f � M / 1 W A yW ` n W M " .. t - *� North Lake Management Review-2018 Map 3. Color represents percentage of water column taken up by plant biovolume in the lake with blue being 0% and red being 100%. Vegetation Biovolume Heat Map �' ttnc take to f J { Y sBing h" Appendix B CITY OF FEDERAL WAY forth Lake Data Analysis 2018 Lake Management District 11/19/2018 North �� ,��. ~nn �� Temperature 2018 25 20 IA 15 *S/9Deep sample ba cu taken at8mn / 10 / ~�--Tempotlm ` � Celsius E w - _ - Temp at9m Celsius ` s / ` ~ \ '. � U 5/9/2018 6/5/2018 7/5/2818 8/7/2018 9/11/2018 10/9/2018 Sample Date North Lake V~sab^U^ty 2018 � o - --- - 4.5 4 3.5 3.5 3iT CL w2S � � � 2 ' - SecchiDepth(m) 1.5 1 0.5 O 5/9/2818 6/5/2018 7/5/2018 8/7/2018 9/11/2018 10/9/2018 North Lake Nitrogen Concentration 2018 3 2.5 2 *5/9 Deep sample taken at 8m m E 1.5 z •[N] at 1m(mg/L) [N] at 9m(mg/L) 1 0.5 — 0 5/9/2018 6/5/2018 7/5/2018 8/7/2018 9/11/2018 10/9/2018 Sample Date North Lake Phosphorous Concentration 2018 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 eo 0.25 E o, 0 2 [P]at 1m(mg/L) [P]at 9m(mg/L) 0.15 _ V 0.1 - 0.05 --- f~ � v 0 — —. 5/9/2018 6/5/2018 7/5/2018 8/7/2018 9/11/2018 10/9/2018 Sample Date North Lake Fecal Coliform 2018 10 9 8 7 E 6 - g 5 �. R LL V Q 4 _ _ Fecal Coliform LL (CFU/100mi) 3 2 0 5/9/2018 6/5/2018 7/5/2018 8/7/2018 9/11/2018 10/9/2018 Sample Date North Lake Geese Sightings 2018 45 40 / 35 30 a, N �+ c7 25 0 d 20 E —a Geese Sightings z 15 - 10 5 i 0 5/9/2018 6/5/2018 7/5/2018 8/7/2018 9/11/2018 10/9/2018 Sample Date North lake Trophic State Index 2018 100 TSI w/Chlorophyll (Carlson, 90 1977) TSI w/Secchi Depth(Carlson, 80 1977) TSI w/Phosphorous, 1m 70 (Carlson, 1977) c 0 ' •TSI w/Phosphorous,9m 60 (Carlson, 1977) vi 50 r *[P] on 5/9/2018 deep sample at dim not 9m 40 -. ' 30 —–, 5/9/2018 6/5/2018 7/5/2018 8/7/2018 9/11/2018 10/9/2018 Sample Date *Used to characterize the health of lakes,using phosphorus,chlorophyll a,or secchi disk.(Chlorophyll is best indicator in summer, phosphorous for other seasons,) TSI Table (Carlson, 1977) Oligotrophy:Clearwater,oxygen Water may be suitable for an unfiltered Salmonid fisheries <30 throughoutthe vear in the hypolimnion. watersupply. dominate. Hypolimnia of shallower lakes may Salmonid fisheries in 30-40 become anoxic. deep lakes only. Hypolimnetic anoxia Mesotrophy:Water moderately clear; Iron,manganese,taste,and odor results in loss of increasing probability of hypolimnetic problems worsen.Raw waterturbidity salmonids.Walleye 40-50 anoxia during summer. requires filtration. may predominate Warm-waterfisheries Eutrophy:Anoxic hypolimnia, only.Bass may 50-60 macrophyte problems possible. dominate. Nuisance macrophytes,algal scum and transparency may Blue-green algae dominate,algal scums Episodes of severe taste and odor discourage swimming 60-70 and macrophvte problems. problem. and boating. Hypereutrophy:(light limited productivity).Dense algae and 70-80 macrophytes. Rough fish dominate; summerfish kills >80 Algal scums,few macrophytes. possible. Appendix C North Lake Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda April 4, 2018 4:00 — 6:00 P.M. Hylebos Room— 2nd Floor City Hall Tentative Committee Attendance: Terry Thomas, Laurence Zimnisky, Lois Kutscha, David Heimer Staff Attendance: Mindi English, Leah Myhre 1. Call Meeting to Order/Introductions 4:00 2. Aquatechnex Contract Expiration — current steps 4:00 —4:10 3. LMD Renewal 4:10 —4:15 4. 2018 Workplan/Budget 4:15 — 4:45 5. Misc. Discussion 4:45 - 6. Adjourn NLT 6:00 - 37) A .9 3 0o a t� t� ' r}••� .moo� �(�� ' �-too m 1 9r w � A W ¢ r F� LL w M A a 3 x aV2 Vn I r � a G.. North Lake Advisory Committee Meeting Notes April 4, 2018 4:00 — 6:00 P.M. Hylebos Room — 2nd Floor City Hall Committee Attendance: Terry Thomas, Laurence Zimnisky, Lois Kutscha, Mary McClellan-Aronen, David Heimer Staff Attendance: Mindi English, Leah Myhre 1. Terry called the meeting to order at 4:04. Attendees did introductions. 2. Mindi informed committee members that all members who applied for re- appointment had been confirmed following interviews with City Council on April 3, 2018. There is still one vacancy on the committee and members will talk with interested residents. 3. Discussion regarding Aquatic Plant Treatment contract renewal. Contract with AquaTechnex expires in May 2018. Mindi has drafted a request for proposal and it is currently routing through management. Goal is to have a contract in place by May 2018. 4. LMD Renewal —the North Lake LMD expires on Dec. 31, 2019. We will need to start the renewal process this summer to ensure enough time to have LMD renewed prior to Dec. 31, 2019. A question was raised regarding votes and if each landowner gets one vote, or if voting rights are based on property size and/or water frontage. 5. Review workplan and budget. a. Terry discussed what the different line items are. Mindi will update columns on page 2 to make sure that balances match. Following these edits, Mindi will forward the workplan to committee members for approval via email. b. The following questions came up during discussion of the work plan: i. How long is landowner permission form good for? The last forms went out in 2015, and allow permission for treatment through September 2018. ii. Who holds the NPDES permit? AquaTechnex holds the permit for both Steel and North Lakes, while the City of Federal Way is the sponsor. c. David Heimer with WDFW asked if the LMD had ever had an aquatic weeds grant from DOE. Mary found info during the meeting that confirmed the LMD did receive a grant from DOE for aquatic weeds in 2005. 6. Newsletter and picnic— committee has agreed to quit printing and mailing the newsletter. Instead, it will be posted on the website and also sent out via emaii. The idea of a picnic was brought up. Mindi is checking with Steel Lake LMD to see if they would be willing to combine efforts for a LMD picnic on September 6, 2018. 7. Following a question from City Council during interviews on April 3, Terry found the list and confirmed that there are 83 properties on North Lake. 8. Email List —Lois has compiled an email list and forwarded it to Mindi. This will be used to email meeting notes, newsletters, and other LMD information to property owners. 9. Lois asked who is in charge of opening and closing the gate to the DFW fishing dock on North Lake. David will check with his staff, and Mindi will check with City Parks Department to find out who is in charge of this. I O.Lois also brought up that the fishing dock is in need of serious repairs and was wondering what would be involved in getting it fixed/replaced. David will research this and get information to the group. I I.Next meeting will be in late May. 12.Meeting adjourned 5:20 p.m. North Lake Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda June 28, 2018 2:00 — 4:00 P.M. Hylebos Room — 2nd Floor City Hall Tentative Committee Attendance: Terry Thomas, Laurence Zimnisky, Lois Kutscha, David Heimer Guest Attendance: Professor James Gawel Staff Attendance: Mindi English, Leah Myhre 1. Call Meeting to Order/Introductions 2:00 2. Aquatechnex Status 2:05 —2:10 3. LMD Renewal 2:10 — 2:15 4. Email List 2:15 —2:25 5. Repairs at WDFW Dock 2:25- 2:30 6. LMD Picnic 2:30 — 2:35 7. Mailing for 2018 2:35 — 2:45 8. Misc. Items 2:45 — 2:55 9. Presentation by Professor Gawel 3:00 Adj ourn 03 cr rA cn co North Lake Advisory Committee Meeting Notes June 28, 2018 2:00 — 4:00 P.M. Hylebos Room — 2nd Floor City Hall Committee Attendance: Terry Thomas, Laurence Zimnisky, Lois Kutscha, Mary McClellan-Aronen, David Heimer Guest Attendance: Darron Nash, Mike Trout Staff Attendance: Mindi English, Leah Myhre 1. Terry called the meeting to order at 2:00. 2. Lois will take the lead on coordinating the email list for North Lake property owners. 3. Lois notes that the WDFW public fishing dock has some soggy boards and needs to be repaired. This is a safety issue. David contacted the access contact with DFW. 4. A question came up regarding fires and suspicious activity noted on IRG property. Residents have noticed campfires in the past in woody areas of IRG property. If fires are observed, residents should call the fire department. For suspicious activity on IRG property, Mike Trout gave out the phone number for IRG's security guard (206)573-4163. 5. Picnic will be held Thursday, September 6, 2018 at Steel Lake Park. An email will be sent to residents in August asking them to RSVP to Mindi. An announcement will also be in the Lake News. Topics for presentations include tubs with examples of native plants, information from DFW on fish species in the lakes and environmental care of the lake. This will be a joint picnic with Steel Lake residents. 6. A question was brought up regarding if there are test strips for algae sampling. Mindi will look into this and get back to the committee at our next meeting. 7. A procedure was put in place to handle calls regarding suspicious algae blooms. The committee discussed options, and the following procedure was proposed and passed: a. Notice to All: If a possible algae bloom appears; resident(s) may contact City of Federal Way Surface Water Management attim Leah Myhre at (253)835-2752 and report. b. Action will be: i. If sighting report is on a Friday, any action will be postponed until Monday due to lite cycle of the sample. ii. Mon— Thurs, sample would be taken, either by resident or CFW SWM staff. 1. SWM staff will visit the lake to determine if a sample needs to be collected. IF sample is collected by a resident, SWM staff will deliver sample to King County Environmental Lab for analysis. 2. Only action that can be taken if sample proves to be harmful to either human health or animals is posting notice on the shore indicating that cyanobacteria has been detected and warning people to stay out of the water due to potential health effects. 3. If a sample is submitted to the laboratory, CFW will notify LMD committee. 8. Reviewed draft Lake News and it will be sent out via email in late July. Mindi will send Lois a copy to distribute via the email list. 9. Meeting adjourned at 3:52 pm and members attended a presentation by Professor James Gawel on the Asarco arsenic study being conducted by UW Tacoma. North Lake Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda November 19, 2018 3:30 - 5:30pm Hylebos Room— 2nd Floor City Hall Tentative Committee Attendance: Terry Thomas (Chair), Laurence Zimnisky, Lois Kutscha, Mary McClellan Aronen, Darron Nash, David Heimer Staff Attendance: Theresa Thurlow, Leah Myhre, Kevin Du, Katherine Straus Guest: Grant Bennett from AquaTechnex 1) 3:30 — 3:32 Call Meeting to Order 2) 3:32 — 3:35 Staffing Updates 3) 3:35 — 3:45 Lake Level Monitoring with NASA 4) 3:45 — 4:15 AquaTechnex — Annual Report, Invasive Plant Treatment, Next Steps 5) 4:15 — 4:30 North Lake Water Quality Graphs & Trends 6) 4:30 — 4:35 Geese Management 7) 4:35 — 4:50 Review Draft 2019 Work Plan 8) 4:50 — 5:00 Review LMD By-laws & Renewal Timeline 9) 5:00 — 5:15 Boat Launch Signage & Dock Repair 10) 5:15 — 5:20 Delinquent Properties 11) 5:20 — 5:25 Email List 12) 5:25 — 5:30 Other Items 71 vo North Lake Advisory Committee Meeting Meeting Notes November 19, 2018 3:30 - 5:30pm Hylebos Room— 2nd Floor City Hall Committee Attendance: Terry Thomas (Chair), Laurence Zimnisky, Lois Kutscha, Darron Nash, David Heimer Staff Attendance: Theresa Thurlow, Leah Myhre, Kevin Du, Katherine Straus Guest: Grant Bennett from AquaTechnex 1) Terry called the meeting to order at 3:35pm. Attendees did introductions. 2) Theresa covered recent staffing updates, including the retirement of Marwan Salloum as the Public Works Director, appointment of EJ Walsh as the new Public Works Director, the hiring of Leah as the new Water Quality Coordinator following a formal hiring process, and the inclusion of Kevin in the Surface Water Management (SWM) team as a temporary Water Quality Sampling & Analysis Assistant. Leah's previous position (Water Quality Specialist) is now open for applications. 3) Katherine Straus, Public Education & Outreach Coordinator for SWM, presented on the Lake Observations by Citizen Scientists & Satellites (LOCSS) program. This program is NASA funded and is supported by a partnership between UNC, UW, and TTU. Lake level data submitted by citizen scientists is combined with lake surface area data from satellites to determine how lake volumes evolve and respond to weather events over time. The program is currently monitoring 23 lakes in the US, and is hoping to monitor more than 200 lakes nationally and globally by 2021. Participation in the program is completely free, and maintenance of the lake level gauge is included. Installation of gauges will occur in late spring/early summer 2019. Committee members demonstrated a high level of interest in this program, and Terry made a motion that North Lake participate in the LOCSS program. The motion was seconded by Darron, and approved by the Committee. Darron is interested in having a gauge near his property, and inquired if North Lake could have multiple gauges. Katherine has emailed the program coordinator to express North Lake's interest. Leah will email the Committee with information on the possibility of multiple gauges when that information is known. 4) Grant Bennett from AquaTechnex reviewed the 2018 Summary of Activities for North Lake. Due to contract renewal negotiations, they were unable to survey the lake until August 17, 2018, and conducted only one survey instead of two as is customary. Grant noted a large amount of Fragrant Water Lily along the shorelines of the lake—especially in the southern areas of the lake, and recommends treatment in 2019 to prevent further spreading. Committee members also voiced concern over the purple loosestrife in llragonfly love at the northeast end of the lake. Grant recommended treatment in July/August, and Leah will remind him prior to his initial survey of the lake that this is a key area of interest for managing vegetation. David mentioned that Map 1 in the report shows only dominant species collected by the rake surveys at those points, and does not include information on the secondary and tertiary plant species (and the percentages present) found when conducting the survey. Grant said he can add that information into his 2019 survey reports. The Committee would also like to see historical spray records, and what percentage of the lake has been treated since there are limits. Grant will also provide a cost estimate for treatment based on the volume of submerged plants he discovers during his initial survey in 2019. The Committee would like to schedule the AquaTechnex surveys as quickly as possible in the new year, with a spring survey in late May/early June, and a fall survey in early September. If a high volume of aquatic vegetation is found, the Committee can choose to apply for an exemption to treat prior to the July 16th treatment season, but this would not likely be granted for just nuisance growth. Leah will coordinate with Grant following the February 2019 meeting to schedule these surveys. 5) Kevin presented his analysis of the 2018 North Lake sampling data to the Committee. His graphs showcased trends for the 2018 sampling season, and included analyses on temperature, visibility, nutrients, fecal coliform, geese and Trophic State Index (TSI). Kevin suggested that the 9m temperature reading on August 7th was a data error, and Darron confirmed that the correct reading was 8.1 T. Furthermore, Kevin concluded that based on Steel Lake's TSI, it is a mesotrophic lake that possesses a moderate risk for algae blooms and has moderate water quality. Darron was particularly interested in how the TSI of the lake predicts fish health and viability in the lake, and is also concerned about the potential for herbicide application to affect fish. David mentioned that he has been in contact with the WDFW Warm Water Fish Program, and will invite a representative to the next meeting so the Committee can hear his perspective on optimizing lake health for fish before making any treatment decisions in the summer. 6) The Committee is interested in discussing a more strategic approach towards geese management. Historically, Weyerhaeuser would addle the eggs, but current IRG efforts are unknown. Leah will email Tom Messmer for more information on this, and will let the Committee know what actions are being taken, if any. The Committee noted that they have recently seen an increase in the number of geese on the lake, and Leah will collect some cost estimates for implementing similar population control strategies as Steel Lake. 7) Review of 2018 Work Plan and current LMD financials. Staff noted that the City's finance department has undergone a high turnover rate in the past few months, and thus there are invoices that have yet to be processed. The Work Plan provided the most up to date records of the revenues and expenditures of the North Lake LMD, and currently shows a carryover into 2019 in excess of $10,000. This figure will shift as more staff time and invoices are processed through the finance department, and Leah will present the 2019 Work Plan with estimated budget figures and 2018 actuals at the February Advisory Committee meeting. Theresa also noted that staff time will be increasing next year due to projected time spent on the LMD renewal process. 8) Review of the 2019 LMD By-laws and Renewal Timeline. There will be increased communication and likely additional meetings throughout 2019 to ensure that the LMD renewal process for North Lake is efficient and on time. The first task for the Committee will be a review of the LMD By-laws and Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP) to determine if there are any desired changes to the current responsibilities and procedures of the LMD. Leah will include attachments to these documents with the meeting minutes so Committee members can review in preparation for the coming year. Due to the increase in staff time for the renewal process, Committee members inquired into the hourly rate of employees when billing to the LMD. Theresa later informed Leah that the Water Quality Coordinator bills at $51.64/hour, the Water Quality Specialist bills at $42.83/hour, and the Public Education & Outreach Coordinator bills at an average of the two, roughly $47/hour. 9) The Committee discussed the derelict and increasingly unsafe condition of the dock at the WDFW boat launch area. David mentioned that grants could be a potential funding source, and are commonly used to replace docks in disrepair. David encouraged sending a letter to the WDFW Director, Kelly Susewind, emphasizing the need for dock repair and highlighting the constant use that the area experiences. The Committee agreed that they would like Leah to draft this letter and submit for Committee review before sending it to WDFW. 10) The Committee reviewed the list of delinquent properties that have not yet paid their annual assessments. King County sent the list to Leah on November i 6, 2018, and the unpaid assessments total just over $2,000. Some property owners have been delinquent for multiple years, and King County handles the enforcement of delinquent payments. Unfortunately, King County is unable to include the LMD assessment with the regular tax bills, and thus the LMD would like to include a reminder in the spring newsletter to pay once bills have been issued by King County in 2019. Leah will follow up with unpaid 2018 assessments with a reminder letter to each delinquent property owner accompanied by a copy of the bill in hopes of collecting unpaid assessments. 11) Lois asked if the Committee would like to continue with updating the email list and using it as a means to send out information to lake residents digitally. The general consensus was in support of the email list, and Leah reported that the current list includes a vast majority of property owners around the lake. Committee members inquired as to the ownership of the list, and Leah will follow up with the City's legal team to determine who is allowed to possess and have access to the list of contacts. 12) There were no additional items to discuss. Meeting adjourned at 5:30pm. Appendix D Initial 2018 North Lake Management District Work Plan Prepared by North Lake LIVID Advisory Committee Federal Way,WA TASK 1 &2 Aquatic Vegetation Control/Treatment Estimated 2017 Actual BALANCE Estimated ork Plan Goals/Scope Expenses Expenses (12/31/2017) Expenses (includes taxes) (includes taxes) Two systematic aquatic plant $3,950 $3,037.00 $913 $3,950 surveys Permit Coverage $875 $585.00 $290 $875 Diver Hand Removal $490 0 $490 $490 Manual Removal $123 0 $123 $130 Noxious Aquatic Herbicide $2,375 $985.50 $1,389.50 $2,375 Treatments Native Aquatic Herbicide $2,375 0 $2,375 $2,375 Treatments Final Year End Report $568 0 $568 $568 Notification $657 $350.00 $307 $657 Meetings $580 0 $580 $580 TASK 1 &2 -Totals $11,993 $4,957.50 $7,035.50 $12,000 TASK 3 Public Education Work Plan Goals/Scope 2017 2017 Actual Balance 2018 Estimated Expenses (12/31/2017) Estimated Expenses (includes Expenses (includes taxes) taxes) Refreshments for quarterly Advisory $25 $46.41 $(21.41) $50 Committee meetings Quarterly newsletter $685 $255.57 $429.43 $685 TASK 3—Totals $710 $301.98 $408.02 $735 TASK 4 Water Quality Monitoring 2017 2017 Actual Balance 2018 Estimated Estimated Expenses (12/31/2017) Expenses Work Plan Goals/Scope Expenses ( (includes taxes) includes taxes) Water Quality Monitoring program $2,850 $3,072.50 $(222.50) $2,850 2018 Workplan Prepared 4/10/18 Page 1 Appendix 1) TASK 4 - Totals $2,850 $3,072.50 $(222.50) $2,850 TASK 5 SWM Staff Time Reimbursement Estimated 1 2017 Actual Balance Estimated l Work Plan Goals/Scope Expenses Expenses (12/31/2017) Expenses (includes taxes) (includes taxes) SWM Staff time $2,500 $2,137.63 $362.37 $2,500 [TASK 5—Totals $2,500 $2,137.63 $362.37 $2,500 LMD Task Budget Totals 2017 2018 Estimated Task Estimated 2017 Actual BaIncome lance Income Income (12/31/2017) REVENUE 2017 Assessment Collection $13,000 $17,241.50 N/A $13,000 Balance from Unused LMD $7,499 $3,056.91 $9,828.80 $9,828.80 Funds EXPENSES 2017 2017 Actual 2018 Work Plan Task Estimated Expenses Balance Goals/Scope Expenses (includes taxes) (12/3112017) (includes taxes) TASK 1 &2 Aquatic Vegetation Control/Treatment $11,993 $4,957.50 $7035.50 $12,000 TASK 3 Public Education $710 $301.98 $408.02 $735 TASK 4 Water Quality $2,850 $3,072.50 $(222.50) $2,850 Monitoring TASK 5 SWM Staff Time $2,500 $2,137.63 $362.37 $2,500 2017 YEAR END BALANCE $10,469.61 $ $18,085 2018 Workplan Prepared 4/10/18 Page 2 Appendix E Steel • North Lake NewsletterFederal Way Surface Water Management 2nd Quarter 2018 A V� deral Way THEVIEW Centered on Opportunity , 5 Easy St'e' _p'sJ6_r_H_6m`a'lthy Yards, Healthy Families, and ■ e Why Go Natural? Pratice Smart Plant Right for Going natural can help you Watering 2Your Site ave Mone on watering,fertitizers, Too much or too 1 Every plant has M and chemicals. little water can both different needs,and Keep family and be harmful to your different parts of your pets healthy by plants,making them yard may be better limiting their contact more likelyto with chemicals. suffer suited for some plants from pests and over others.When Protect water quality by limiting theamount disease.Instead,water you put the right plant in the right place, of chemicals and nutrients that run off of your infrequently but deeply,create healthy all your plants will thrive and your yard property into our nearby lakes. soil that water can soak into,and will be easier to care for. maintain your irrigation system. 3 Build Healthy Soil Use Less t ` Practice Natural Compost,mulch,and other natural 4Sprays ,�„ Lawn Care •l, amendments help build Use natural pest and Lawns are where we often use the healthy soil.Healthy soil weed control practices most pesticides,water,and fertilizers. retains more water and first.Try using pest Proper mowing,using"slow release"or reduces run-off into local traps,fabric row covers,and natural "organic"fertilizers,aerating your soil, waterways.It also makes repellents to fight insects and weeds and smart watering will help you create plants healthier so they are more resistant before picking up the chemical sprays. a lush,green lawn,naturally. to pests,lessening the need for chemicals. AAK r + Y p ;u O o N C 1 ` C G N u L O .. C v Y > N.O P 4' -' v L OF �tl•O v P N �a `'o' � o' 3 �� `�— F >,v r•it o v r c�i `o `a�•� 3 v ci a� 7s •U,' q�' � api 3.X j c n c.P 5 m iE 13 car!�y /1 O N O N c Y U q N ttl y Ob C7 a t o E �`• .. E c " >,v v v Y °�L m .�,. c `� c 4 T o-. v 0. ro ".) ,� E ❑ °-5 y N vP A c `° w d o.�0 50`o N o o y o a v —u a4i o .� � o c7 `� o o ^= o °�Ll U o t' .0 tf' CIA cl s p a o o v vim„ Y v 7 .w a� V m� _= ca c =d Tv w % 3 ro u v ° c °a a c. `o y U p 7 co m c °p 0,2 m .c c E r aro E t ouQ a C ^ _ N R `O a� cd� �v°.� v N ^i " y 4 v o .n O c c « �A .. c ca c ie � �• _. ..' � � ^� V o c7aa°Ji a a. O ccroi v%, .�°• ri O c w J n C � O N O �O CO '•i � C =0 W A N ON " N '. N C S ��t C '� •� } ' L' S•"'" L r E ° cP v o�.. v '3 N �Q W Q _ vP] o �u; 3�` Nv a� a oma✓ n o r�L3Cc a a M � • i � H lu So o ;r • N • bALA m cL • CITY OF 4600'*- "' • DepartmentPublic Works Surface Water Management 33325 Sth Avenue South Federal Way,WA 1 Help lzeep your lahe clean. • notfeedthe waterfowl. North and Steel Lake Residents- please mark your calendars for an educational opportunity and fun social gathering. North and Steel Lake Residents are invited to the Lake Management District cookout and potluck! Thursday, September 6th Shelter #1 �• The Lake Management Districts will .. ='� , ` # .' . . • provide hot dogs, hamburgers and ► M Residents with the last name beginning � �,,.�" �._ with the letters: �,� °'"� A through K should bring salads, fruit, or vegetable dishes; L through Z should bring breads, chips or pasta dishes. Please RSVP to Mindi English at mindi.english@cityoffederalway.com COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: Sa CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY WATER QUALITY CAPACITY GRANT AND ACCEPT GRANT FUNDS SHOULD THEY BE AWARDED POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council authorize SWM staff to apply for Department of Ecology Water Quality Capacity Grant as well as accept grant funds should they be awarded? COMMITTEE: n/a MEETING DATE: n/a CATEGORY: ❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ® City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other ............. STAFF REPORT BY: Theresa Thurlow, P.E. Surface Water tNlaliager .,'i"�' DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Memo Options Considered: 1. Authorize SWM staff to apply for Department of Ecology Water Quality Capacity Grant as well as accept grant funds should they be awarded. 2. Do not approve submittal of this grant funding request. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor re ,9>Tmends Option 1. MAYOR APPROVAL: DIRECTOR APPROVAL: Committee Counnits,VDatr ! Initial/Date Initial+Dnte COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:n/a Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize SWM staff to apply for Department of Ecology Water Quality Capacity Grant as well as accept grant funds should they be awarded. (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED- 4/2019 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 16, 2019 TO: City Council VIA: Jim Ferrell,May,,��oF} FROM: EJ Walsh,P.E:, Kblic Works Director Theresa Thurlow,P.E_ Surface Water Manager SUBJECT: Authorization to apply for Department of Ecology Water Quality Capacity Grant and accept grant if awarded. BACKGROUND On July 2, 2019 the Department of Ecology announced the availability of Capacity Grant funding in an amount up to $50,000.00 for each Phase I and II jurisdiction,to be used to carry out the requirements of the NPDES permit through training, equipment purchases, education and outreach, inspection/monitoring and program development. The application period closes on August 2, 2019. SWM has received Capacity Grant funding every grant cycle since Ecology established the grant in 2013. In past grant cycles, the City used funds to support the following NPDES program elements: • Purchase and setup of a new asset management system • Public education and outreach activities, including Storming the Sound with Salmon • Public involvement and stewardship activities • Illicit discharge detection and elimination(IDDE) activities • Pollution prevention, good housekeeping, and operation and maintenance activities • Equipment purchases that result directly in improved compliance with the permit • Storm system mapping and assessment COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#:___8b--- CITY CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR AND ACCEPT DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY GRANT FUNDS IN SUPPORT OF WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING OUTREACH PROJECTS POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council authorize submittal of a grant funding request to the Department of Ecology as well as subsequent acceptance of this grant funding in order to support implementation of local projects focused on waste prevention and recycling outreach? COMMITTEE: n/a MEETING DATE: n/a CATEGORY: ❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ® City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Jeanette Brizendine,Recycling Project Manager DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Staff Report Options Considered: 1.Authorize submittal and acceptance of this grant funding request as outlined in the attached Memo. 2. Do not approve submittal of this grant funding request. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the July 16, 2019 City Council Business Agenda for approval. MAYOR APPROVAL: I DIRECTOR APPROVAL: i'` --7 o Ic( Committee oune InitiallDate Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:n/a Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize submittal of a request for grant funds as well as execution of an interagency contract to accept subsequently awarded grant funds to support local waste prevention and recycling outreach projects." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances on/v) ORDINANCE# REVISED- 4/2019 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 16, 2019 TO: City Council VIA: hill l errell. .N�iwyol- Io`L FROM: LJ f I-'11 .+11, 1'.L-�. P 1L>lic Works Director Jeanette Brizendine, Solid Waste &Recycling Project Manager SUBJECT: Authorization to Apply for and Accept Department of Ecology Waste Reduction and Recycling Education Grant BACKGROUND: On July 1, 2019 the Department of Ecology announced it was opening the application period for the Waste Reduction and Recycling Education(WRRED) Grants Program for the 2019-21 State biennium. This competitive grant program provides up to $60,000 dollars to qualified local governments and nonprofit organizations for programs designed to help the public with waste reduction,recycling, composting, and litter control. The process is on a fast track with applications due August 8, 2019, so this item has been added directly to the Council Business agenda. SWR Division's goals and objects as outlined in the 2019-20 budget include an overarching goal of promoting and implementing waste reduction,recycling and composting programming for residents and businesses.The City currently provides a wide range of existing programs to meet these goals such as recycling events, mailings, educational classes,business and multifamily outreach and other"green"events. With additional funding, services could be expanded to reach a wider segment of the population, specifically for multifamily outreach and educational workshops. Benefits of Additional Grant Resources for Multi-Familv Residents: City staff and contractors provide technical recycling assistance to multifamily properties featuring door-to- door educational outreach to residents,resulting in increased diversion of recyclables. The multifamily sector typically has lower recycling rates due to a variety of factors including: lack of financial incentives, resident turnover, often easier access to garbage, and language barriers. Door-to-door outreach requires considerable resources including staffing,recycling flyers and recycling tote bags, so it is not possible to reach the 15,000+ multifamily households in Federal Way within the current budget. This grant funding would expand contractor resources and provide direct recycling education to an additional 4,000 residences over the biennium. Benefits of Additional Grant Resources for Community Waste Reduction Programs: City staff partner with other agencies to provide educational workshops and fix-it events for Federal Way residents. Free workshops span a broad range of sustainable topics including natural yard care,backyard chickens, food presentation, solar energy and more and attract crowds up to 75 residents per workshop. Equally large crowds regularly attend Repair Cafes where clothing and household items can be repaired for free.The additional grant funding would expand programming to support eight Repair Cafe events and sixteen educational workshops over the biennium. Ce' Project File Day File \\CFWFILEI\Department\PW\SWR\GRANTS\2019\DOE WRRED 19-21\DOE WRRED Grant Memo 19-21.doc July 16,2019 City Council Meeting Authorization-Department of Ecology WRRED Grant Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPACTS: WRRED grant funding was not incorporated into the adopted 2019/2020 106 - Solid Waste and Recycling Fund budget. City staff proposes that any awarded grant funding be programmed into the 106 Fund and allocated to expand outreach programs. The WRRED grant requires a 25% match of the total eligible costs, and ample matching funding is available via the King County Waste Reduction and Recycling(WRR) grant which is programmed into the 106 Fund budget and currently funds a majority of SWR Division's educational outreach programs. The following table outlines the Program Elements, proposed funding and match Dept.of Ecology\ Ing County Program Element WRR Grant Total Budget WRRED Grant (25%Match_)__ Multifamily Recycling Outreach • Staff Support $15,000 $5,000 $20,000 • Consultant • Materials Environmental Workshops &Repair Cafes • Staff Support $16,500 $5,500 $22,000 • Promotion • Speaker Fees • Facility Rental TOTAL $31,500 $10,500 $42,000 In the event this grant funding is awarded, City Council is also being asked to approve execution of the related interagency agreement. This will expedite implementation of these grant-funded services. COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: SC CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:RESOLUTION: i APPOINTING INDIVIDUALS TO PRO AND CON COMMITTEES TO WRITE PRO AND CON STATEMENTS REGARDING AN ADVISORY VOTE WHETHER TO ALLOW MARIJUANA RELATED BUSINESSES IN THE CITY. POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council approve a resolution to appoint individuals to Pro and Con Committees to write pro and con statements for the advisory vote regarding whether to allow marijuana-related businesses in the City? COMMITTEE: N/A MEETING DATE: N/A CATEGORY: ❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ® City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: J. Ryan Call, City Attorng DEPT: Law Attachments: Staff Report Resolution Options Considered: 1. Approve the proposed resolution to appoint individuals to Pro and Con Committees. 2. Amend the proposed resolution to appoint individuals to Pro and Con Committees. 3. Do not approve the proposed resolution to appoint individuals to Pro and Con Committees and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 MAYOR APPROVAL: N/A -7 /I f9 DIRECTOR APPROVAL: �1 Committee coofill 1tuEinllD ate Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:N/A Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of the proposed resolution. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances onl)) ORDINANCE# REVISED—4/2019 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 11, 2019 TO: City Council Members VIA: Jim Ferrell, Mayor FROM: J. Ryan Call, City Attorney SUBJECT: Resolution: Appointment of Pro and Con Committee Members to Allow Marijuana Related Businesses Financial Impacts: There are no financial impacts with the exception of staff time to transmit information to the King County Elections Office. Background Information: RCW 29A.32.280 requires the City Council to formally appoint two Committees of not more than three individuals,one to write an argument in support and one in opposition of the proposed ballot title for the advisory vote to be included in the November 5, 2019 Voter's Pamphlet. The Council will appoint members amongst those who have signed up to represent their respective group. Rev.7/18 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City of Federal Way,Washington,Appointing Pro and Con Committees to Write Pro and Con Statements for the Advisory Vote regarding Whether to Allow Marijuana-Related Businesses in the City. WHEREAS,on June 4,2019,the City Council unanimously authorized an advisory vote of Federal Way residents regarding whether the City Council should enact an ordinance allowing marijuana-related businesses to locate within the City of Federal Way; and WHEREAS,pursuant to RCW 29A.32.280 the City Council desires to appoint individuals to the pro and con committees to submit written arguments for the Local Voters' Pamphlet regarding this advisory vote; and WHEREAS,the City Council adopted Resolution 19-763 on July 2, 2019, setting July 16, 2019, to appoint individuals to pro and con committees; and WHEREAS,the City issued a press release on Wednesday,July 5,2019 seeking individuals willing to serve on the committees; and WHEREAS, the City Council has interviewed all individuals who have expressed their willingness to serve on the pro or con committees to write an argument for the advisory vote in support or opposition of allowing marijuana-related businesses in the City. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Pro Commi(tee I ppoi ntinent.The City Council appoints the following individuals to serve on the Pro Committee to write the argument in support of allowing marijuana-related businesses in the City: Resolution No. 19- Page 1 of 3 Rev 1/19 Section 2.Con C'oi i ETi itteu::11,)1)o i ntinent.The City Council appoints the following individuals to serve on the Con Committee to write the argument in opposition of allowing marijuana-related businesses in the City: Section 3. Designation of Spokespersons. The City Council directs the members of each committee to choose a spokesperson amongst themselves no later than August 6, 2019. Section 4. Certify Committee. Following the interviews and designation of committee members as described in Sections 3 above,the City Clerk is hereby directed to submit the names of the members of each committee to King County Elections no later than August 6, 2019. Section 5. Severabili�.If any section, sentence,clause or phrase of this resolution should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution. Section 6. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this resolution are authorized to make necessary corrections to this resolution including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, resolution numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto. Resolution No. 19- Page 2 of 3 Rev 1/19 Section 7. Ratification.Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 8.Effective Date.This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the Federal Way City Council. RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON this 16th day of July, 2019. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: JIM FERRELL, MAYOR ATTEST: STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO.: Resolution No. 19- Page 3 of 3 Rev 1/19 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: 8d CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:RESOLUTION:PLACING CITIZEN INITIATIVE NO. 19-001 CONCERNING RENTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDLORDS AND RENTAL RIGHTS FOR TENANTS ON THE NOVEMBER 5,2019 MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION. POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council pass a resolution placing Citizen Initiative No. 19-001 concerning the enactment of rental requirements for landlords and rental rights for tenants on the November 5, 2019 municipal general election? COMMITTEE: N/A MEETING DATE: N/A CATEGORY: ❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ® Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: J. Ryan Call, Ci Attorney DEPT: Law Attachments: Proposed Resolution Background: On June 27, 2019, the City received a citizen initiative petition concerning the enactment of rental requirements for landlords and rental rights for tenants. The effectiveness of the proposed resolution is contingent upon King County providing a certificate of sufficiency to the City regarding the number of signatures required to place the initiative on the ballot. If the certificate is received, Citizen Initiative No. 19-001 shall be placed on the next municipal general election to be held on November 5, 2019. Options Considered: (1)Approve the proposed resolution. (2)Modify the proposed resolution. (3)Do not approve the proposed resolution and provided direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1. MAYOR APPROVAL: N/A -7 11 DIRECTOR APPROVAL: Committee Quat it I Initial/Date Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:N/A Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of the proposed resolution." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—4/2019 RESOLUTION# RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City of Federal Way, Washington, placing Citizen Initiative No. 19-001 concerning the enactment of rental requirements for landlords and rental rights for tenants on the ballot for the November 5, 2019 the municipal general and requesting that King County publish and distribute initiative No. 19-001 in the Local Voters' Pamphlet. WHEREAS,pursuant to Chapter 1.30 FWRC,the City received a Citizens' Initiative Petition ("Petition") on June 27, 2019; and WHEREAS,the City Clerk assigned the Petition number 19-001 ("Initiative No.19-001 and WHEREAS, Initiative No.19-001 concerns the enactment of rental requirements for landlords and rental rights for tenants; and WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Federal Way,has not yet received a certificate of sufficiency from King County Elections that the number of valid signatures on the Petition are sufficient; and WHEREAS, pursuant to FWRC 1.30.160(2), the City Council has determined that—if the City receives a certificate of sufficiency from King County Elections that the number of valid signatures on the Petition are sufficient—the proposed ordinance shall go to a vote of the people at the next general election on November 5, 2019; and WHEREAS, the enactment and effective date of this resolution shall be dependent upon receipt of a notice of sufficiency from King County Elections; and NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Resolution No. 19- Page I of 4 Rev 1/19 Section 1. Ballot Title. The proposition to be submitted at the general municipal election on November 5, 2019, shall be in the form of a ballot title as follows: BALLOT TITLE City of Federal Way Citizen Initiative No. 19-001 concerns enacting rental requirements for landlords and rental rights for tenants. This citizen initiative would enact an ordinance to amend the Federal Way Revised Code to require landlords to comply with existing rental laws; to establish obligations and duties for landlords, and defenses and rights for tenants, regarding: requirements that landlords must meet before evicting tenants, retaliatory actions, rental agreements, and rental agreement renewals; to create classes of tenants afforded additional rental rights; and to adopt penalties for landlords and procedures to enforce the measure. Should this citizen initiative be enacted into law? YES NO Section 2. Filing. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with King County Elections. Section 3. The City Council hereby requests the King County Elections Office place the ballot title on the November 5, 2019 municipal general election ballot. Section 4. Local Voter`s Pamphlet. The City Council further requests King County Elections publish the ballot title, explanatory statement, and committee statements, if obtained, in the Local Voters' Pamphlet and distribute a Local Voters' Pamphlet for this issue. Section_5.,Severability.If any section,sentence,clause or phrase of this resolution should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or Resolution No. 19- Page 2 of 4 Rev 1/19 unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution. Section 6. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this resolution are authorized to make necessary corrections to this resolution including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, resolution numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto. 5ccti o» 7. i catic ii.Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 8.Effective Date.This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the Federal Way City Council and receipt of a certificate of sufficiency from King County Elections. If the City does not receive a certificate of sufficiency from King County Elections,this resolution shall not take effect and shall be null and void. RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON this day of . 2019. [signature page follows] Resolution No. 19- Page 3 of 4 Rev 1/19 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: JIM FERRELL, MAYOR ATTEST: STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO.: Resolution No. 19- Page 4 of 4 Rev 1/19 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM No.: 8-e _____ CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:RESOLUTION:DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR THE PRO AND CON COMMITTEES FOR CITIZEN INITIATIVE NO. 19-001 AND SETTING A DATE OF JULY 30 2019 TO MAKE COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS. POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council approve the proposed resolution that directs the City Clerk to advertise for volunteers to participate in the pro and con committees regarding Citizen Initiative No.19-001 and sets July 30, 2019 as the date for appointing up to three individuals to each committee? COMMITTEE:N/A MEETING DATE: N/A CATEGORY: ❑ Consent f Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY:J. Ryan Call, Attorney DEPT: Law Attachments: Proposed Resolution Background: On June 27, 2019, the City received a citizen initiative petition concerning the enactment of rental requirements for landlords and rental rights for tenants ("Initiative No. 19-001"). This proposed resolution directs the City Clerk to advertise for volunteers to participate in the pro and con committees regarding Initiative No. 19-001 and sets July 30, 2019 as the date for appointing up to three individuals to each committee. Options Considered: (1) Approve the proposed resolution. (2) Modify the proposed resolution. (3) Do not approve the proposed resolution and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1. MAYOR APPROVAL: N/A DIRECTOR APPROVAL: Orc- 1.1(1114 Committee Cc unci Initial/Date Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:N/A Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of the proposed resolution." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL No. ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE No. REVISED—4/2019 RESOLUTION No. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City of Federal Way,Washington,directing the City Clerk to advertise for, and set the date to appoint up to three individuals to the pro committee and up to three individuals to the con committee for Citizen Initiative No. 19-001. WHEREAS,pursuant to Chapter 1.30 FWRC,the City received a Citizens' Initiative Petition ("Petition") on June 27, 2019; and WHEREAS,the City Clerk assigned the Petition number 19-001 ("Initiative No. 19-001 and WHEREAS, Initiative No. 19-001 relates to the enactment of rental requirements for landlords and rental rights for tenants; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 29A.32.280 the City Council desires to appoint three individuals to the pro committee and three individuals to the con committee to submit written arguments for the Local Voters' Pamphlet regarding Initiative No. 19-001; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the best interest of the citizens to direct the City Clerk to advertise and notify the public in advance of the date for selecting the pro and con committee members. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Clerk shall advertise to solicit names of citizens interested in serving on the pro or the con committees to write statements in the Local Voters' Pamphlet. The names shall be submitted to Council for appointment on the established date. Resolution No. 19- Page I of 3 Rev 1/19 Section 2. The City Council hereby sets the date of July 30,2019,for Council to appoint up to three individuals who have indicated an interest in serving on the pro committee for the Local Voters' Pamphlet for Initiative No. 19-001. Section 3. The City Council hereby sets the date of July 30,2019, for Council to appoint up to three individuals who have indicated an interest in serving on the con committee for the Local Voters' Pamphlet for Initiative No. 19-001. Section 4. Severability.If any section,sentence,clause or phrase of this resolution should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution. Section 5. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this resolution are authorized to make necessary corrections to this resolution including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, resolution numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto. Section 6.Ratification.Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 7.Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the Federal Way City Council. RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON this day of 32019. [signatures to follow] Resolution No. 19- Page 2 of 3 Rev 1/19 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: JIM FERRELL, MAYOR ATTEST: STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO.: Resolution No. 19- Page 3 of 3 Rev 1/19 OfCOUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 0 _ CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:FEDERAL WAY POLICE SUPPORT SERVICES ASSOCIATION COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the Proposed 2019 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Police Support Services Association("PSSA")? COMMITTEE: N/A MEETING DATE: N/A CATEGORY: ❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ® City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY:J.Ryan Call, City AttorneyDEPT: Law Attachments: Staff Report Proposed 2019 Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement Options Considered: 1. Approve the proposed Agreement and authorize the Mayor to execute the necessary documents. 2.Reject the proposed Agreement and direct the City to continue negotiations. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1. MAYOR APPROVAL: N/A -7/j/ DIRECTOR APPROVAL: M l Committee ccrit iE Initial/Date Initial/Date l n i t i al/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:N/A Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of the proposed 2019 Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Federal Way Police Support Services Association." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—4/2019 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 10, 2019 TO: City Council Members VIA: Jim Ferrell, Mayor FROM: J. Ryan Call, City Attorney SUBJECT: Police Support Services Association ("PSSA") Collective Bargaining Agreement- 2019 Financial Impacts: The cost to the City of this contract is covered in the approved budget under the Police Department. The proposed contract will increase wages of the represented employees by 2%, which is the same increase that was applied to the rest of City staff for 2019. Background Information: The PSSA contract expired on December 31, 2018. The negotiation teams have meet and have proposed the following changes for the contract in addition to the salary increase for 2019. ■ Include PSSA in the scheduled salary survey • Flex shift for Animal Services employee with approval of supervisor Other changes from the last contract are in the document are considered housekeeping items. They include items such as language changes to conform with the Janus decision related to union dues, incorporating a Memorandum of Understanding dated April 2018 regarding sick leave, and Community Center Membership. Rev.7/18 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY AND FEDERAL WAY POLICE SUPPORT SERVICES ASSOCIATION Collective Bargaining Agreement 2019 Table of Contents PREAMBLE..................................................................................................... ...........-••..............1 ARTICLE 1: RECOGNITION AND BARGAINING UNIT ......................................................................1 Section 1. Recognition of the Unit...................................................................................................1 Section2. Bulletin Board..................................................................................................................1 Section 3. Association Officials Release Time...............................................................................1 ARTICLE 2: MEMBERSHIP AND DUES DEDUCTION........................................................................2 Section1. Dues Deduction...................................................... ................................................ .......2 ARTICLE 3: EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES...........................................................................................2 Section1. Seniority Definition ................................................. .......................................................2 Section2. Layoff................................................................................................................................2 Section 3. Establishment of Reinstatement Register....................................................................3 Section 4. Employment Status When Reinstated ..........................................................................3 Section5. Non Discrimination ........................................................... ..............................---............3 Section6. Personnel Files................................................................................................................3 Section 7. Employment References ................................................................................................4 ARTICLE 4: HOURS OF WORK AND OVERTIME..............................................................................4 Section1. Hours of Work.....................................................................•• ........... ••. ...........4 Section2. Overtime...........................................................................................................................5 Section 3. Comp Time in Lieu of Pay for Overtime........................................................................5 Section 4. Overtime Minimum -Call Back/Court Time ..................................................................6 Section5. Shift Bidding................................................................•..................••. •••................6 ARTICLE5—MANAGEMENT RIGHTS..................................................................................................•....7 ARTICLE6 -SICK LEAVE...........................................................................................................................8 Section1. Accrual and Usage..........................................................................................................8 Section 2. Washington Paid Sick Leave......................................•...................................................9 Accrual...................................................................................................................................................9 CarryForward......................................................................................................................................10 Verification of Absences Exceeding Three Days.................................................................................10 Reinstatementof Employment.............................................................................................................10 RetaliationProhibited...........................................................................................................................10 Section3. Domestic Partner...........................................................................................................10 ARTICLE7— HOLIDAYS........................................................................................................................ ..11 Section1. Holidays Observed........................................................................................................11 ARTICLE 8 - EDUCATION ALLOWANCE..............................................................................................••.12 Section1. General Policy ....................................................... .......................................................12 ARTICLE9—VACATION.......................................................................................................•.•••............-•.13 Section1. Vacation.................................................................•-•......................................................13 Section 2. Scheduling Annual Leave—Seniority Basis ..............................................................14 Section3. Payout.............................................................................................................................14 Section 4. Maximum Carry Forward..............................................................................................14 Section5. Service Leave ................................................................................................................14 ARTICLE10— PENSIONS.................................................................. ......................................................14 ARTICLE 11 - BEREAVEMENT AND OTHER LEAVES...........................................................................15 Section1. Bereavement..................................................................................................................15 Section2. Personal Leaves................................................................. ..........................................15 Section 3. Leave of Absence—Medical— Non-FMLA..................................................................16 Section4. Shared Leave.................................................................................................................16 Section5. Military Leave..................................................... ....-..-.................................,..........,.16 ARTICLE 12 -CITY SUPPLIED EQUIPMENT...........................................................................................17 ARTICLE 13 - SAVINGS CLAUSE ............................................................................................................17 ARTICLE 14- ENTIRE AGREEMENT.............................................................................. ........................1$ ARTICLE 15 - PERFORMANCE OF DUTY...............................................................................................18 Section 1. Non-Strike Provisions...................................................................................................18 ARTICLE 16: GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE........................................ ..18 Section 1. Grievance Procedure Steps .........................................................................................18 Section 2. Arbitration Panel ...........................................................................................................20 Section3. Time Limits......................:................................................__..........................................21 Section 4. Multiple Procedures................................................................................................ .....21 Section5. Step 3 Submission ........................................................................................................21 Section6. Just Cause Standard.....................................................................................................21 Section 7. Parties to the Agreement..............................................................................................21 Section 8. Probationary Period......................................................................................................21 ARTICLE 17 - EMPLOYER& EMPLOYEE RIGHTS.................................................................................22 Section1. Discipline........................................................................................................................22 Section 2. Disciplinary Investigations...........................................................................................22 Section 3. Psychological Evaluations...........................................................................................23 ARTICLE 18 -COMPENSATION...............................................................................................................23 Section1. Salaries...........................................................................................................................23 Section2. Out of Class...................................................................................................................24 ARTICLE 19 -INSURANCE COVERAGE .................................................................................................24 Section 1. Medical/Dental Plans........................................................................__....-----................24 Section2. Life Insurance................................................................................................................25 ARTICLE 20 - FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY CENTER....................................................., .... ...............25 ARTICLE 21 -SUBSTANCE ABUSE POLICY..........................................................................................25 ARTICLE 22 - PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEES........................................................................................25 ARTICLE 23 -TERM OF AGREEMENT....................................................................................................26 APPENDIXA...............................................................................................................................................27 WAGES...................................................................................................................................................27 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY AND POLICE SUPPORT SERVICES ASSOCIATION Collective Bargaining Agreement PREAMBLE The collective bargaining agreement (the Agreement) herein contains the entire agreement between Federal Way Police Support Services Association (hereinafter called the Association) and the City of Federal Way, Washington (hereinafter known as the City). The purpose of the City and Association in entering into this agreement is to set forth their complete agreement with regard to wages, hours and working conditions for the employees in the bargaining unit. ARTICLE 1: RECOGNITION AND BARGAINING UNIT Section 1. Recognition of the Unit The City recognizes the Association as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative for the bargaining unit described as all full time and regular part-time special commission and non-commissioned employees as listed in Appendix A of the City of Federal Way Police Department, excluding supervisors, confidential employees and all other employees. The Association agrees that Records Supervisors shall be excluded from the bargaining unit. Section 2. Bulletin Board The City shall permit the use of a bulletin board by the Association for the posting of notices relating to official Association business, so long as the notices posted are not inflammatory or otherwise detrimental to the operation of the Department. Section 3. Association Officials Release Time a. Time off with pay shall be limited to regular negotiations sessions between the City and the Association negotiating team members during their scheduled duty hours, up to a limit of three members off with pay at a time. b. The Department shall afford Association representatives a reasonable amount of time while on-duty to consult with appropriate management officials, Association counsel and/or aggrieved employees, provided that the Association representatives and/or aggrieved employees contact their immediate supervisors, indicate Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 11 the general nature of the business to be conducted, and request the necessary time off. Such time off will not be allowed whenever the City reasonably determines it will interfere with Department operations, and Association representatives shall not use excessive time in handling such responsibilities. The Association shall give the City as much advance notice as reasonably possible of such time off requests. ARTICLE 2: MEMBERSHIP AND DUES DEDUCTION Section 1. Dues Deduction The parties agree to the following: 2.1.1 The deduction of monthly dues uniformly levied by the Association for those employees who elect to become members of the Association and who request in writing to have their regular monthly Association dues deduction checked off on the basis of individually signed voluntary check-off authorization cards; 2.1.2 Each month, the City shall remit to the Association, all dues deducted together with a list of employees and the amount deducted from each employee. The City agrees to notify the Association of new employees within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of hire. 2.1.3 Hold Harmless. The Association agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, directors, employees and agents harmless from any and all claims, demands, actions, and liabilities (including attorney's fees) arising from resulting from or connected with the City's compliance with this Article. ARTICLE 3: EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES Section 1. Seniority Definition For purposes of shift bidding, vacation bids, and layoff and recall, seniority shall be defined as the employee's length of continuous service within their classification. For all other purposes, seniority shall be defined as the employee's length of continuous service with the City's police department. Seniority shall be broken by resignation, termination for cause, layoff without recall for a period of 12 consecutive months, illness, injury or other leave of twelve (12) consecutive months. Section 2. Layoff Should it become necessary due to budgetary conditions, lack of work, or any other reasonable cause, to reduce the number of employees in this unit, the following basic provisions will apply: Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 12 a. Order of layoff shall be determined by job classification. Regular employees will be retained on the basis of job performance. Relative job performance will be determined based upon relative qualifications, experience, and job performance evaluations. If job performance is equal, seniority in the classification will be the determinative factor. b. Employees affected by the reduction in force shall receive thirty (30) calendar days' notice of such layoff, or pay in lieu thereof. Section 3. Establishment of Reinstatement Register a. The names of employees who have been laid off shall be placed upon a reinstatement register for the same classification from which laid off. This reinstatement register shall be in effect for one (1) year from the date of layoff, and shall take priority over other hiring or promotional lists. b. Refusal to accept a recall from the reinstatement register for employee's former classification shall terminate all rights granted under this Agreement, and the employee shall be removed from the register. C. Order of Reinstatement. If a vacancy is to be filled from the reinstatement register, recall shall be made on the basis of length of service within the classification. The regular employee on such register who has the most service credit shall be first reinstated. Section 4. Employment Status When Reinstated In the event a employee leaves the service of the City due to a reduction in force and within the next year the City rehires said former employee in the same classification to which assigned at the date of reduction, such employee shall be placed at the step in the salary range which the employee occupied at the time of the reduction. Section 5. Non Discrimination It is agreed that the City will not discriminate on the basis of age, sex, marital status, race, creed, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, disability or activity protected by RCW 41.56. Section 6. Personnel Files All personnel records are maintained in compliance with the laws related to public records. Each employee is entitled to review and have photocopied his or her personnel file and/or police department personnel file. An employee shall have an opportunity to submit a letter to the file, responding to or supplementing information contained in his or her file. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 13 Upon receiving a request for all or part of a personnel file, the affected employee shall be notified of the request, and the information shall not be released for a period of three (3) business days from the time of said notification, except upon service of a court order or subpoena properly recorded and signed by a judge or magistrate demanding immediate release. Section 7. Employment References Unless otherwise required by a valid court order or by law, at the written request of the subject employee, or whenever the employee provides a written release to the prospective employer, the City will furnish prospective employers with only the following information about past or present employees to persons outside the City of Federal Way: • Dates of employment. ® Current job title or job title at the date of separation. ® Verification of salary information. A copy of all requests for any information regarding past or present City employees shall be sent to Human Resources. ARTICLE 4: HOURS OF WORK AND OVERTIME Section 1. Hours of Work The normal work schedule for employees covered by this agreement shall not exceed 40 hours of work in a seven (7) consecutive day period. The work week will commence at the beginning of day shift on Sunday and end with completion of Saturday night's graveyard shift. Where reasonably possible, the employee's work schedule shall be posted at least thirty (30) days prior to the beginning of the applicable work period. The normal work schedule for all employees covered by this Agreement shall be designed with a 30 minute paid lunch period. The City will work in good faith with the Association and employees to ensure that employees are able to receive their meal period. The work schedule shall be four consecutive ten (10) hour shifts followed by three (3) consecutive days off. Provided this work schedule may be altered by mutual agreement between the City, the Association and the employee. The hours of work for the Animal Services officers shall be four consecutive ten (10) hour shifts followed by three (3) consecutive days off. Provided, that the following conditions apply: a. These hours and days of the 4/10 schedule shall be determined by management; Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 14 b. If an Animal Services Officer is going to be unavailable for an extended period of time (40 hours or more) for any reason including but not limited to sick leave, vacation leave, or training, management will have the right to move the remaining Officer back to a 5/8 schedule during the period in which only one Officer is available; c. Animal services employees will be permitted to flex shift start and end times upon approval of the supervisor; d. All other provisions in Section 4 apply. Scheduling changes may be made where there is a reasonable operational need. Mutual agreement is required before changes to the length of shift in a classification. Except in emergencies, the employer will provide a minimum of seven (7) days notice before any schedule change. Employees shall receive one and one half the regular rate of pay for all mandatory shift changes with less than seven (7) days notice, through the notice period. The Employer will bargain with the Union before implementing any schedule configuration other than ten hour shift. Section 2. Overtime a. All overtime shall be compensated at a rate of one and one-half (1.5) times the employee's regular hourly rate. Overtime is defined as hours worked, together with holiday, vacation, sick leave or compensatory time hours, in excess of: 1. the regularly scheduled shift for full time regular employees within a twenty-four (24) hour period OR; 2. over eight (8) hours per day for part time regular employees OR; 3. over forty (40) hours in a seven (7) day week. b. In all cases overtime will be computed to the nearest one-quarter (1/4) hour. c. Overtime and premium pays shall not be duplicated or pyramided. Compensation shall not be paid more than once for the same hours under the provisions of this Agreement. Section 3. Comps Time in Lieu of Pay for Overtime Upon receiving concurrence of the City, an employee may elect to receive compensatory time in lieu of overtime pay. Compensatory time is accrued at the rate of one and one-half (1.5) hours for each hour of overtime worked. Compensatory time Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 15 may be accrued to a maximum of eighty (80) hours. Compensatory time in excess of eighty (80) will be paid as overtime. Upon termination, unused compensatory time will be paid at the current rate on the final paycheck. Section 4. Overtime Minimum - Call Back/Court Time Employees "called back" to work (including court appearances on behalf of the City) shall receive a minimum of two (2) hours pay at one and one half time the regular rate for the work for which they were called back. Call back occurs when the employee has finished his/her last regular shift but before beginning the next regular shift with less than twelve hours notice; or when requiring an employee to report on his/her day off. When an employee, not scheduled for call back, is called with less than one hour notice the pay calculation shall begin from the period when the employee is notified. When an employee, not scheduled for call back, is called with more than one hour notice but less than twelve hours notice the pay calculation shall begin from the time the employee leaves his/her residence. When an employee is scheduled for call back or receives more than twelve hours notice the pay calculation shall begin when the employee actually reports for work. Employees called back may be required to perform other duties for the duration of the minimum guarantee if the duty necessitating the call back does not take the full two hours. Section 5. Shift Bidding a. Records specialists shall be allowed to bid for shifts within their respective classifications by seniority. The bid cycle shall be for a period of one year, as determined by the City. Bidding for shifts will commence in October of each year for shifts effective January 1St of the next year. The City reserves the right to assign or transfer an employee from one shift to another, where reasonably required by operational considerations. b. If there is a vacancy at the time of shift bid, the vacancy will be identified by management. The identified vacant shift is unavailable for bid; however, consideration will be given to those members who make their interest known when submitting their bid (i.e. my bid is graveyard but would prefer vacant late-mid shift). When fully staffed, the Records members who have demonstrated interest in the vacant shift will receive first consideration by seniority. c. Management has the authority to adjust shifts for operation purposes. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 16 ARTICLE 5 — MANAGEMENT RIGHTS Section 1. The Association recognizes the right of the City to operate and manage its affairs in all respects in accordance with its lawful authority. The City retains the authority that the City has not expressly delegated or modified by this Agreement. Section 2. Management rights and responsibilities shall include, but are not limited to, the following examples: 1. The City and the Department shall retain all rights and authority to which by law they are entitled. 2. The City shall have the authority to organize and reorganize the operations within the Department. 3. The Association recognizes the right of the Department to enforce the Department Rules and Regulations, and operational procedures and guidelines. 4. The City has the exclusive right to schedule work and overtime work as required in the manner most advantageous to the City, consistent with the applicable provisions of this Agreement. 5. The City has the right to assess an employee's performance of their job. 6. The City has the right to: a. discipline, demote, suspend, and discharge non-probationary employees for just cause. Scheduling of disciplinary days off will be at the convenience of Department operations. b. to discharge probationary employees for any reason. Employees who are discharged before completing their probationary period shall not have access to the grievance procedures of this Agreement to protest or challenge the discharge or the reasons therefor. c. to recruit, hire, promote, fill vacancies, transfer, assign, and retain employees. d. to lay off employees for lack of work or funds or other legitimate reasons. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 17 7. The City has the right to determine business hours, to determine the starting and quitting times, and to discontinue work that would be wasteful or unproductive. 8. The City has the right to control the Police Department budget. 9. The City has the right to determine the methods, location, means and processes by which work shall be accomplished. 10. The City shall have the right to take any and all actions necessary in the event of an emergency. Section 3. The parties recognize the City may perceive a need to make operational changes in areas that are not covered by the above management responsibilities, and that are not otherwise explicitly covered by this Agreement. In the event the City desires to make such a change (in a mandatory subject of bargaining) the City shall give the Association at least ten (10) days' notice of the desired change. The Association may request bargaining of the issue, and the City thereafter will meet with the Association in an effort to resolve the issue. Should resolution not be achieved, either party may request the assistance of a PERC mediator and the parties will mediate for a period of thirty (30) days. Ultimately, the City may implement the change, after bargaining in good faith and impasse is reached. ARTICLE 6 - SICK LEAVE Section 1. Accrual and Usage Sick leave shall be accrued by regular, full-time employees at the rate of eight (8) hours per month. Regular, part-time employees shall accrue sick leave on a pro-rated basis in the same percentage as the employee's average weekly scheduled hours relate to a forty (40) hour week. An employee may accrue up to 720 hours in his or her sick leave account. Sick leave is to be used in cases of illness, accident or other conditions which require medical treatment or supervision and require an employee to be absent from work. Sick leave may be used to care for an employee's own health condition, to care for a dependent child (including dependent step-child or foster child) under the age of eighteen (18) with a health condition that requires treatment or supervision, a spouse, parent, parent-in-law, or grandparent of the employee who has a serious health condition or as more particularly established in WAC 296-130. Sick leave may also be used for the care, treatment and preventative health care of the employee and dependents. The parties agree that sick leave should not be abused, and that such abuse is cause for discipline. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 18 Section 2. Washington Paid Sick Leave Pursuant to Chapter 296-128-600 through 296-128-770 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) and Revised Code of Washington 49.46.210, Washington Paid Sick Leave is available to Association members to care for their health and the health of their family members. Washington Paid Sick Leave may be used for: an employee's mental or physical illness, injury or health condition; preventive care such as medical, dental or optical appointments and/or treatment; care of a family member with an illness, injury, health condition and/or preventive care such as medical, dental, optical appointment; closure of the employee's place of business or child's school/place of care by order of a public official for any health-related reasons; and when the employee or the employee's family member is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. Authorized use of Washington Paid Sick Leave for domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking includes: seeking legal or law enforcement assistance or remedies to ensure the health and safety of employee's and their family members including, but not limited to, preparing for, or participation in, any civil or criminal legal proceeding related to or derived from domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking; seeking treatment by a health care provider for physical or mental injuries caused by domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking; attending health care treatment for a victim who is the employee's family member; obtaining, or assisting the employee's family member(s) in obtaining services from a domestic violence shelter, a rape crisis center, or a social services program for relief from domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking; obtaining, or assisting a family member in obtaining mental health counseling related to an incident of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking in which the employee or the employee's family member was a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking; and participating, for the employee or the employee's family member(s), in safety planning, or temporary or permanent relocation, or other actions to increase the safety from future incidents of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. For purposes of Washington Paid Sick Leave, "family member" is defined as: a biological, adopted, or foster child, stepchild, or a child to whom the employee stands in loco parentis or legal guardian, or is de facto parent, regardless of age or dependency status; a biological, adoptive, de facto, or foster parent, stepparent, or legal guardian of an employee or the employee's spouse or domestic partner, or a person who stood in loco parentis when the employee was a minor child; a spouse, domestic partner, grandparent, grandchild or sibling. Accrual As established by law, an employee shall accrue one (1) hour of Washington Paid Sick Leave for every forty (40) hours worked. Washington Paid Sick Leave will accrue in conjunction with regular sick leave according to the collective bargaining agreement. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 19 Carry Forward The total sick leave hours that will be carried forward at year-end, for both standard sick leave and Washington Paid Sick leave, will be seven hundred sixty (760) hours. This will include a maximum of forty (4) hours of Washington Paid Sick Leave as provided by law. If an employee is not at the maximum carry forward of seven hundred sixty (760) hours, any hours of Washington Paid Sick Leave in excess of the forty (40) hour carry forward amount will be transferred to the city sick leave bank, so that employee does not lose hours that they previously would have banked prior to the establishment of Washington Paid Sick Leave. In no case will more than a combined total of seven hundred sixty (760) hours be carried forward. Verification of Absences Exceeclin Three Days If an employee is seeking to use or has used Washington Paid Sick Leave for authorized purposes for more than three (3) consecutive days during which the employee is/was required to work, the employee may be required to provide documentation that establishes or confirms that the use of paid sick leave is for an authorized purpose. Reinstateinent of Employment Employees separating or retiring from employment will not be provided with financial or other reimbursement for unused, accrued Washington State Paid Sick Leave. If an employee leaves employment and is rehired within twelve (12) months of separation, any accrued, unused paid sick leave will be reinstated to the employee's paid sick leave bank. Should the reinstatement occur in a new fiscal year, the maximum bank will be the forty (40) hours carry over provided that the employee had forty (4) or more hours banked upon separation. Retaliation Prohibited Pursuant to Chapter 296-128-770 of the WAC, any discrimination or retaliation against an employee for lawful exercise of paid sick leave rights is prohibited. Employees will not be disciplined for the lawful use of Washington Paid Sick Leave. Section 3. Domestic Partner A person whom a City employee identifies as his or her domestic partner by completing an Affidavit of Domestic Partnership will be provided the same consideration as an employee's "spouse" for purposes of this Agreement. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 110 ARTICLE 7 — HOLIDAYS Section 1. Holidays Observed On January 1St of each year, the City shall bank (provide) one hundred sixteen (116) hours of holiday pay for each bargaining unit employee. Following are the official observed holidays: Commonly Called First day of January New Year's Da Third Monday of Janua Martin Luther King Da Third Monday of February_ President's Day Last Monday of May Memorial Day Fourth day of July Independence Day First Monday of September Labor Da 11th Day of November Veteran's Da Fourth Thursday of November Thanksgiving Da Friday following Day after Thanksgiving 25th day of December Christmas Day 2 Floating Holidays For employees hired after January 1 St in a given year, the City may prorate the hours to be banked and shall bank (provide) the number of hours of holiday pay calculated by multiplying the number of holidays remaining to be celebrated in that year by eight (8) hours (e.g., for an employee hired on March 1St, sixty four (64) hours calculated by multiplying the number of holidays remaining to be celebrated in that year [eight (8)] by eight (8) hours); provided that the City shall not be required to bank hours for a Floating Holiday for any employee hired after July 1St during the employee's year of hire. If an employee permanently leaves the service of the employer before December 31St of any given year, the City may deduct banked hours credited to the employee's holiday pay bank equal to the number of holidays remaining to be celebrated in that year multiplied by eight (8) hours, as well as eight hours for the floating holiday if the termination occurs prior to July 1St of that year. Section 2. The decision of whether an employee will be required to work on an observed holiday will be made by the City. An employee who is required to work on an observed holiday as set forth above shall receive his/her regular rate of pay for hours worked, except that, an employee who is required to work on either Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year's Day or an additional day each year to be designated by the City prior to December 1 of the previous year, shall be paid at time and one half for all hours worked. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 111 Section 3. All employees shall make reasonable efforts to expend their banked holiday hours prior to the end of each year (December 31). Employees may use their banked holiday hours in increments no smaller than two hours, and shall use all banked holiday hours prior to using any vacation hours. Banked holiday hours shall be used on a first earned, first out (FIFO) basis. In the event an employee does not use all of his/her banked holiday hours prior to December 31, the employee will forfeit the remaining banked holiday hours, except that an employee may carryover unused banked holiday hours until June 30 of the following year, if: a. the employee makes a reasonable effort to use his/her banked holiday hours/pay, the employee is denied the opportunity to use banked holiday hours/pay by his/her supervisor, and the employee has written documentation of said effort in the form of completed Department leave request forms reflecting that the use of banked holiday hours/pay had been denied by the employee's supervisor, and/or b. the employee was prevented from using banked holiday hours/pay because of approved leave resulting from military service, long term disability, work related injury, or a similar reason. If an employee is unable to schedule banked carry-over time to be used by June 30{h of the following year, the Deputy Chief shall attempt to schedule the banked carry- over time prior to June 30th of that year. If the Deputy Chief is unable to schedule the banked carry-over time by June 30th of that year, the City shall, upon the employee's next regularly scheduled payday, cash out the hours that cannot be further carried-over under these provisions at the employee's then-current rate of pay. An employee whose work schedule is other than an eight-hour day may use accrued vacation leave or compensatory time to supplement the holiday pay in order to receive the entire workday off with pay. ARTICLE 8 - EDUCATION ALLOWANCE Section 1. General Policy a. The City recognizes the need to encourage and promote educational opportunities for employees. The City will reimburse personnel for costs incurred in receiving approved education upon satisfactory completion of such education to the extent covered by the City's education reimbursement policy. Eligible costs include: Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 112 1 . Tuition; and 2. Books. b. If an employee is attending an accredited State institution, the employee shall be reimbursed based upon that institution's tuition schedule. If an employee is attending a non-State supported institution, the employee shall be reimbursed on the basis of the University of Washington tuition schedule. Any and all education assistance reimbursement is suspended indefinitely. C. Continuing Education Incentive AA- $40.00 per month BA- $80.00 per month In order to receive this premium, the degree must be in a field of study related to the employee's assignment, as reasonably determined by the Department. In addition the employee must fulfill a continuing education requirement of at least one Department approved college class per year or 20 hours of pre-approved specialized training over and above Department mandated training. The decision of whether to attain this incentive is discretionary with the employee, and all time spent travelling to and attending classes shall be on the employee's own time. The City's education reimbursement program shall apply to the Association, and should the City fail to fund the program, such that the employee can not receive reimbursement for the tuition, the continuing education requirement shall be waived for that year. ARTICLE 9 — VACATION Section 1. Vacation Members of the bargaining unit shall receive annual leave benefits as follows: ANNUAL COMPLETION OF: VACATION HOURS: Through end of year 5 96 hours Upon beginning of year 6 132 hours Upon beginning of year 11 150 hours Upon beginning of year 16 180 hours Upon beginning of year 21 204 hours Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 13 Section 2. Scheduling Annual Leave — Seniority Basis During January, the Department shall conduct a bid for vacations for the following year. The bid shall be by seniority, and conducted by division and shift. All vacation bid requests shall be for work weeks. Vacation requests submitted subsequent to the vacation bid shall be considered dependent upon Department needs on a first, come first served basis. The City shall make the determination of how many employees may be on vacation at any one time. If the City cancels vacation once it has been approved and the affected employee has incurred non-refundable expenses in planning for the same, the employee shall be reimbursed by the City for those expenses. Any employee called back to duty once vacation has begun shall be reimbursed for any additional transportation costs incurred in returning to duty. Section 3. Payout Upon separation, all vacation hours accrued will be paid at the regular rate of pay. Section 4. Maximum Carry Forward a. An employee may not carry over to each subsequent calendar year more than two hundred forty (240) hours of vacation. b. Upon the effective date of the termination of an employee's employment, such employee shall thereupon be entitled to a sum of money equal to the employee's current straight-time hourly rate for any accrued unused vacation leave time, which shall be paid on the employee's final paycheck, up to two hundred forty (240) hours maximum. C. The City will schedule vacations, consistent with Department needs and coverage. Section 5. Service Leave Regular employees will be provided a one-time accrual of 40 hours (pro-rated for regular part-time employees) of vacation leave after each consecutive 10 year period of continuous employment (i.e. after 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, etc.). ARTICLE 10 — PENSIONS Pensions for employees and contributions to pension funds will be governed by Washington State Statute. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 1 14 ARTICLE 11 - BEREAVEMENT AND OTHER LEAVES Section 1. Bereavement Employees may take up to thirty (30) hours of bereavement leave for a death in the employee's immediate family. For purposes of this section immediate family is defined as a spouse, siblings, children, grandparents, grandchildren, in-laws, parents, aunts, and uncles. At its option, the Employer may construe this definition more broadly to include other persons living in the employee's household, or to established relationships having attributes to familial ties. With advance Department Director approval, up to an additional fifty-six (56) hours of sick leave may be utilized in these situations. With Department Director approval, an employee may use sick leave, not to exceed eight (8) hours, to attend the funeral of close friends or other relatives. Section 2. Personal Leaves A personal leave of absence is a privilege the City may extend to qualified regular full-time and regular part-time employees for specific periods of time under certain circumstances. It allows an employee to take time off from work for personal reasons (see also 11.5 Military Duty). All such leaves are taken without pay. A leave of absence must be requested in writing and submitted to the employee's immediate supervisor and department director for a recommendation as soon as the need for such a leave is known. The department director shall then forward the request to Human Resources for review. Only the Mayor may grant or deny any such personal leave requested. The employee may request or may be required by the City to use accrued vacation or compensatory time to offset loss of pay during the leave. No benefits such as vacation or sick leave are earned while on unpaid leave. Employees on leave may return early from leave if they notify the supervisor in advance. Failure to return from leave on or before the agreed upon date, however, will result in termination. An unpaid leave of more than thirty (30) calendar days will affect an employee's review dates. These days will be adjusted forward until the employee has completed as many days of continuous employment as the length of the leave of absence. An employee normally will be assured of returning to his or her position for a leave of absence of one hundred eighty (180) days or less in duration. Because of staffing requirements, however, it may be necessary to fill the current position for a leave of absence in excess of one hundred eighty (180) days. In this event, efforts will be made to place the employee in an available, open, comparable position. During any unpaid leave of one hundred eighty (180) days or less, an employee may continue his or her group insurance coverage by prepaying on a monthly basis the premium plus two percent (2%) during any affected period of the leave. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 115 Sick leave accrual shall not be used for non-medical leaves of absence. Section 3. Leave of Absence — Medical — Non-FMLA Medical leaves of absence may be granted for regular full-time and regular part- time employees who are unable to perform their job duties due to an illness or an accident and who are ineligible for or have exhausted FMLA leave. This medical leave of absence requires a doctor's certification and cannot exceed one hundred eight (180) days total, including any FMLA leave. During medical leave, the employee may receive previously earned sick pay and earned but unused vacation benefits. A written request for a medical leave of absence must be returned to the department director along with a doctor's certification indicating the nature of the medical problem and the anticipated length of absence. A medical leave of absence may be extended, upon a written request, accompanied by an explanation from the employee's doctor of the need for an extension period. Even with an extension, however, a medical leave cannot exceed one hundred eighty (180) days total, including FMLA leave. Employees returning from a medical leave of absence must provide a doctor's written certification of their ability to return to work. The City reserves the right to require an examination by a doctor of the City's choice. Employees returning from a medical leave of one hundred eight (180) days or less return to the same position or a similar position of like pay or status, provided however, that the employee remains subject to legitimate job changes or layoffs that would have occurred even if they had not been on leave. During the paid medical leave of absence, the City will pay its portion of the employee's group insurance premiums for up to six (6) months total, including during FMLA leave. An unpaid leave of more than thirty (30) calendar days will affect an employee's review dates. These days will be adjusted forward until the employee has completed as many days of continuous employment as the length of the leave of absence. Section 4. Shared Leave The City's currently existing shared leave policy will be available for the duration of this Agreement. Section 5. Military Leave Any employee who is a member of the Washington National Guard or a federal military unit is entitled to leave from his or her duties as provided for by law, and shall be paid as required by law. An employee shall provide the City with notice of the leave as soon as the employee learns of the assignment, and shall furnish the City with a copy of his/her orders. A military leave shall be limited to the time of the military assignment. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 116 ARTICLE 12 - CITY SUPPLIED EQUIPMENT a. The City shall provide any federal and/or state required safety gear and apparatus. b. Employees who suffer a loss or damage to personal property and/or clothing in the line of duty shall be reimbursed for such loss or damage by the City, provided a claim is filed with the City. Loss due to neglect, negligence or abuse by the employee shall not be considered for reimbursement, nor shall damage caused by normal wear and tear. Reimbursement shall be limited to personal property with a reasonable and ordinary value (i.e. — no Rolex watches). C. The City shall purchase the following uniforms for customer service personnel and provide dry cleaning: 1. Property/Evidence_'Section: 3 polo shirts with City logo (navy, black, or tan) and 3 slacks (navy, black, or tan), 1 wool sweater zip or button (navy or black), and 1 winter jacket (black or navy). 2. Quartermaster: 3 polo shirts with City logo (navy, black, or tan) and 3 slacks (navy, black, or tan), 1 wool sweater zip or button (navy or black), and 1 winter jacket (black or navy). 3. Animal Service Officers shall be reimbursed $100.00 per year for expenses incurred purchasing work boots. Unused reimbursement money may be rolled over to the next year in the event an employee does not purchase boots during a year. The City agrees to repair and/or replace clothing provided by the City as determined by the supervisor. Except as noted above, the City will not require that members of the association wear employer-provided uniform items. The Association members will instead abide by Section 9.2 (Personal Appearance and Dress) of the City of Federal Way Employee Guidelines. ARTICLE 13 - SAVINGS CLAUSE If any article of the agreement or any addenda hereto should be held invalid by operation of law or by any tribunal of competent jurisdiction, or if compliance with or enforcement of any article should be restrained by such tribunal, the remainder of the agreement and addenda shall not be affected thereby and the parties shall enter immediate collective bargaining negotiations for the purpose of arriving at a mutually satisfactory replacement of such article. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 117 ARTICLE 14 - ENTIRE AGREEMENT The agreement expressed herein in writing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and no oral statement shall add to or supersede any of its provisions. The parties acknowledge that each has had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals with respect to any matter deemed a proper subject for collective bargaining. The results of the exercise of that right are set forth in this agreement. Therefore, except as otherwise provided in the agreement, the City and Association, for the duration of this agreement, each voluntarily and unqualifiedly agree to waive the right to oblige the other party to bargain with respect to any subject or matter specifically covered by this agreement. ARTICLE 15 - PERFORMANCE OF DUTY Section 1. Non-Strike Provisions Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to give an employee the right to strike and no employee shall strike or refuse to perform his assigned duties to the best of his ability. The Association agrees that it will not condone or cause any strike, slowdown, mass sick call, or any other form of work stoppage or interference to the normal operation of the Federal way Police Department. ARTICLE 16: GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE Section 1. Grievance Procedure Steps [Open, clean up and simplify] a. Any grievance that may arise between parties concerning the application, meaning, or interpretation of this Agreement, shall be settled in the manner prescribed by this grievance procedure. b. A "Grievance" is defined as a claim or dispute by an employee, group of employees, or the Association concerning the interpretation or application of the provisions of this Agreement. Nothing in this procedure shall prohibit an employee from discussing a complaint directly with his supervisor or department head without representation by the Association, as provided by State Law. C. Should a subject for claim or dispute arise, there shall be no stoppage of work by employees, but an earnest effort shall be made to settle such claims or disputes promptly and in the manner hereinafter outlined. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 118 Step 1 An employee or a group of employees claiming to have a grievance shall discuss the complaint with the immediate supervisor within ten (10) calendar days of the alleged occurrence, or when they reasonably should have known of the alleged occurrence. Step 2 The supervisor shall attempt informal resolution of the grievance within seven (7) calendar days after it is presented. Step 3 Provided the grievance is not settled satisfactorily at step 2, it may be presented to the Police Chief (or designee) by the Association within seven (7) calendar days of the supervisor's response or the expiration of the time limit in step 2. The submission shall be in writing, setting forth the nature of the grievance, the articles of this agreement allegedly violated, and the requested remedy. Step 4 The Police Chief or designee shall attempt to settle the grievance within ten (10) calendar days after it has been presented, and shall respond in writing. Step 5 If the grievance is not settled by the Police Chief within the time allowed, it may be presented in writing to the Mayor, with a copy to the Director of Human Resources, by the Association within seven (7) calendar days of the Police Chief's response or the expiration of the time limit in step 4. Step 6 The Mayor shall have fourteen (14) days to review the grievance. If the Mayor does not respond or otherwise settle the grievance within the fourteen-day period, the grievance shall be automatically advanced to step 7, and shall not be forfeited by either party. Step 7 a. If the grievance is not settled at step 6, and involves a matter other than discipline, the dispute will be referred to the negotiating committee of both parties. The two committees shall meet within ten (10) calendar days to consider the dispute. At that meeting, all pertinent facts and information will be reviewed in an effort to resolve the matter through conciliation. If no satisfactory solution is Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 119 reached in this step, the matter may be submitted in writing to arbitration within 30 calendar days of the conciliation meeting. b. If the grievance is not settled at step 6 and involves discipline other than an oral or written warning, the matter may be submitted, in writing, to arbitration within thirty (30) calendar days of the date that the Mayor's review is due. Oral and written warnings may only be grieved through step 6 of this procedure. However, if the City attempts to introduce prior oral or written warnings in a subsequent discipline case that is subject to arbitration, the City shall be required to prove that it had just cause to issue those prior oral or written warnings as well as the instant discipline. Section 2. Arbitration Panel The City and the Association mutually agree to a permanent panel of arbitrators to hear all grievances in arbitration. The panel shall consist of three arbitrators: Janet Gaunt, Gary Axon, and Ken Latsch. Only one arbiter shall hear each grievance and they shall be picked in rotation, provided that either party may elect to disqualify one arbiter on the list for a particular hearing. The Association must exercise its right to disqualify the arbiter at the top of the rotation list in writing, filed at the same time it submits the dispute to arbitration pursuant to step 7 of the grievance procedure. If the City wishes to exercise this right, it must do so within twenty (20) days of being served with the Association's demand for arbitration. The decision of the Arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties. a. The Arbitrator shall make his/her own rules of procedure. The Arbitrator shall have no authority to amend, alter, or modify this Agreement or its terms, and shall limit his/her decision solely to the interpretation and application of this Agreement. b. Each grievance or dispute will be submitted separately except when the City and the Association mutually agree to have more than one grievance or dispute submitted to the Arbitrator. C. The losing party shall bear the expense of the Arbitrator. The losing party shall be denominated in the award. When there is no winning party, the cost of the Arbiter shall be borne equally by the parties. All other costs and fees will be paid by the party incurring the cost/fee. d. The Arbitrator shall have thirty (30) days from the close of the hearing to issue an award. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 120 Section 3. Time Limits Time limits will be strictly adhered to, but may be extended by mutual written agreement upon reasonable request, except for situations where no timely grievance is filed. While forfeiture under this clause will finally resolve the matter in dispute, it will not establish a precedent between the parties on issues of contractual interpretation. Section 4. Multiple Procedures If employees have access to multiple procedures for adjudicating grievances, the selection by the employee of one procedure will preclude access to other procedures; selection is to be made no later than at the conclusion of step 6 of this grievance procedure. Section 5. Step 3 Submission In those instances where disciplinary action is based on reasonable evidence of the commission of a crime, or the proposed discipline involves suspension or termination of the employee, step 3 of the Grievance Procedure will be initiated immediately. Section 6. Just Cause Standard No post probationary employee may be discharged, suspended without pay, demoted (except as provided below) or disciplined in any way except for just cause. The City may withhold a step increase, for a specified period of time, if it has just cause. Section 7. Parties to the Agreement In as much as this is an agreement between the City and the Association, no individual employee may make use of the provisions of this Article, except as expressly provided above. Section 8. Probationary Period All newly hired employees must serve a probationary period. The probationary period for newly hired employees shall be one year. The probationary period shall be extended for the number of work days equal to the number of work days an employee was absent in excess of 10 work days during the probationary period. The probationary period is an extension of the hiring process; therefore, the provisions of this Article (including the Just Cause Standards in Section 16.6) will not apply to employees if they are discharged during their initial probationary period. Grievances brought by probationary employees involving issues other than discharge may be processed in accordance with this Article. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 121 r ARTICLE 17 - EMPLOYED & EMPLOYEE RIGHTS Section 1. Discipline It is agreed that the employer has the right to discipline, demote, suspend, or discharge any employees for just cause. Section 2. Disciplinary Investigations In criminal matters, an employee shall be afforded those constitutional rights available to any citizen. In administrative matters relating to job performance, the following guidelines shall be as follows: a. "Interrogation" as used herein shall mean any questioning by an agent of the City who is conducting an investigation (as opposed to a routine inquiry) of the employee being interrogated, when the agent knows (or reasonably should know) that the questioning could result in employee discipline. b. Before interrogation, the employee shall be informed of the nature of the matter in sufficient detail to reasonably apprise him/her of the matter. Nothing herein shall operate as a waiver of the Association's right to request bargaining information. C. Any interrogation of an employee shall be at a reasonable hour, preferably when the employee is on duty, unless the exigencies of the investigation dictate otherwise. d. Any interrogation shall take place at the City Police Department, except when impractical. The employee shall be advised of their right to and shall be allowed that PSSA representation to the extent allowed by the law. e. The questioning shall not be overly long and the employee shall be entitled to such intermissions as are reasonably necessary. f. The employee shall not be subjected to any offensive language or abusive questioning, nor shall he/she be threatened with dismissal, transfer or other disciplinary punishment as a guise to attempt to obtain his/her resignation. g. The Employer shall not require any employee covered by this Agreement to take or be subjected to a lie detector test as a condition of continued employment. Nor shall polygraph evidence of any kind be admissible in disciplinary proceedings, except by stipulation of the parties to this Agreement. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 122 h. The Department may, and upon request will, tape record any interrogation. Upon request, a copy of the tape/transcript (if made) will be provided to the employee. Section 3. Psychological Evaluations The purpose of this Section is to balance the interest of the Employer in obtaining a psychological evaluation of an employee to determine the employee's fitness for duty and the interest of the employee in having those examinations being conducted unobtrusively, and so as to protect the employee's privacy. Generally, an evaluation will be ordered only if the employer has a reasonable concern that an employee is psychologically unfit to perform the job. a. Results of the Evaluation. The City shall provide the doctor with the employee's job description and other information necessary for the doctor to understand the duties and responsibilities of the employee. The doctor will issue a written report to the Employer and the employee. The only information which the doctor may disclose shall be whether the employee is fit or unfit for duty or requires modified work conditions, and the prognosis for recovery, and the reason why the doctor has reached those conclusions. Additionally, where the cause of the unfitness is duty-related, the doctor shall disclose that cause. If the doctor believes the employee is fit for duty but needs modified work conditions, the doctor will indicate what modifications are necessary and the extent or duration projected of the modification. The doctor will keep all data that has been made available to him or her confidential and not release it to any of the parties except the employee. Modified work conditions may include light duty assignments of limited duration. b. As used in this section, "doctor' refers to a psychologist or psychiatrist. ARTICLE 18 - COMPENSATION Section 1. Salaries a. The wage scale attached as Appendix A. Effective January 1, 2019 the wage scale will be increased by 2%. b. Paid Lunch. Refer to Section 4.1 Hours of Work C. Extra-Duty Pay. Employees assigned as Records Training Specialists ("RTSs") shall receive an additional three (3) percent of the top step wage rate per month, as extra-duty pay for all time spent in the actual training of Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement-2019 Page 123 employees. The Property Evidence Technician, who has been trained and certified to test marijuana, shall receive an additional five (5) percent of top step wage rate per month, as extra-duty pay for all time spent in actually testing marijuana. d. On-Call Pay. Employees assigned as Animal Services Officers shall receive an additional three (3) percent of the top step wage rate for all time spent on-call to provide coverage for unscheduled absences shorter when the work schedule has not been adjusted. Section 2. Out of Class Extra Duty pay may be awarded to a single individual who, for a period of time exceeding thirty (30) calendar days, assumes substantial responsibilities when assigned to substitute in a vacant position, in addition to performing the duties of the position currently held. The vacancy may be due to termination, leave of absence, extended illness or other reasons approved by the Mayor or his/her designee. When such an assignment extends beyond thirty (30) calendar days, the employee may receive up to a ten percent (10%) increase for the entire extra duty time. The percentage of Extra Duty pay awarded will be determined by the department director, and funding for the additional compensation will come from the department budget. The added compensation will cease when the assignment ends. ARTICLE 19 - INSURANCE COVERAGE Section 1. Medical/Dental Plans a. The City shall pay each month one hundred percent (100%) of the premium necessary for the purchase of employee coverage and ninety percent (90%) of the premium necessary for the purchase of dependent coverage (excluding spouses who have other coverage available through his/her place of employment) under the Kaiser Permanente PPO Access or HMO insurance plans as selected by the employee. The City will reimburse actual expenses incurred in order to cover the annual deductible payments under the PPO Plan ($100 individual, max $300 family). b. The City offers a two tier co-pay for health insurance (Plan A and Plan B) depending upon participation in wellness. Employees will remain on the lower co-pay plan (Plan A) if they earn 1000 points (Biometric Screening and Healthscreening Questionnaire required and earns 500 points) by November 30 of each year in order to be eligible for Plan A in the succeeding year. c. The City agrees to place the members and eligible dependents on dental coverage Plan F. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 124 Section 2. Life Insurance The City shall pay the entire premium for double indemnity life insurance coverage for each eligible employee in the bargaining unit. The City will determine the manner in which insurance coverage is secured. The amount of life insurance shall be equal to one times the employee's annual base salary to a maximum of$110,000and a minimum of$25,000. ARTICLE 20 - FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY CENTER PSSA members are eligible to receive membership at the Federal Way Community Center by signing up for a payroll deduction of six dollars ($6.00) per pay period. This membership is on a quarterly basis and enrollment must be received by the 15th of the first month of the new quarter. Employees who visit the FWCC at least eighteen (18) times during the quarter will receive a fifteen dollar ($15.00) rebate check. Employees may only cancel their membership after the last payroll deduction for the quarter has been completed and upon written request. If an employee cancels their membership mid-year, they are not eligible to rejoin until the following calendar year. While the City anticipates adequate funding, should there be higher than projected use, passes will be issued as indicated above only until the funding is exhausted. Employees have the option to add family members at an additional cost. For more information please contact the Community Center directly. Community Center membership as described above is being provided on a trial basis and may be modified or discontinued at the sole discretion of the City. ARTICLE 21 - SUBSTANCE ABUSE POLICY No employee shall be required to take or be subjected to any random alcohol or drug testing as a condition of continued employment, except when: 1. the City has a "reasonable suspicion" that an employee may be under the influence of drugs or alcohol while on duty and/or 2. an employee who, while driving a City vehicle or while driving on City business, is involved in an accident which results in a serious injury or in which the employee is cited under local or state law for a moving traffic violation. ARTICLE 22 - PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEES All newly hired and promoted employees must serve a probationary period. The probationary period for newly hired employees shall end one year from the date the employee begins work for the City. The probationary period upon promotion shall be one year from the date of appointment. The probationary period shall be extended for the number of work days equal to the number of work days an employee was absent in excess of 10 work days during the probationary period; provided that the taking of Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 125 scheduled and approved vacation shall not be counted toward the ten day period for promotional probationers. The probationary period is an extension of the hiring process; therefore, the provisions of the grievance procedure will not apply to employees if they are discharged during their initial probationary period or are demoted during the promotional probationary period for not meeting the requirements of the classification. Grievances brought by probationary employees involving issues other than discharge or demotion may be processed in accordance with Article 17. ARTICLE 23 - TERM OF AGREEMENT The effective date of this Agreement is January 1, 2019 and shall remain in force until December 31, 2019. Any changes in wages, hours or working conditions from those previously in effect shall become effective upon the execution of this agreement unless a specific, different effective date is indicated for a particular change. [A one year agreement should allow the City time to do a wage analysis.] Signed this day of 2019, at Federal Way, Washington. City of Federal Way Police Support Services Association Jim Ferrell, Mayor Karen Grossnickle, President Approved as to form: J. Ryan Call, Interim City Attorney Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 126 APPENDIX A WAGES GENERAL WAGE ADJUSTMENTS: Effective January 1, 2019 a 2.0% increase Customer Service 3741 3898 4063 4233 4414 4733 Specialist a18 Records Specialist(a18) 3741 3898 4063 4233 4414 4733 Administrative Assistant 1 3741 3898 4063 4233 4414 4733 a18) Property/Evidence Tech. 3926 4094 4269 4447 4635 4967 a20 Animal Services Officer 4358 4545 4739 4937 5146 5515 a24 Public Records 4696 4893 5098 5312 5536 5934 Coordinator a27 CALEA/Volunteer 5005 5219 5439 5668 5907 6331 Coordinator a30 Crime Analyst and 5005 5219 5439 5668 5907 6331 Prevention Specialist a30 Quartermaster(a30) 5005 5219 5439 5668 5907 6331 Crime Analyst/Prevention 5259 5478 5708 5950 6199 6646 Program Coordinator a32 PSSA will be included in the Classification/Compensation and Workload Study be conducted by Cabot Dow in 2019. Police Support Services Association Collective Bargaining Agreement -2019 Page 127 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM ,.-8.o," CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: RESOLUTION: TO APPROVE PLACING A COUNTYWIDE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES LEVY PROPOSAL ON THE NOVEMBER 5,2019 BALLOT. POLICY QUESTION: Should the City of Federal Way approve placing a countywide levy proposal to fund Emergency Medical Services(EMS) on the November 5, 2019 ballot. COMMITTEE: N/A MEETING DATE:N/A CATEGORY: .......... ❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance [J Public Hearing City Council Business ® Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: J. Ryan Call, City. DEPT: Law Attachments: Staff Report King County Staff Report Resolution Options Considered: 1. Approve the proposed resolution 2. Do not approve the proposed resolution MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 MAYOR APPROVAL: N LA 1 DIRECTOR APPROVAL: RC 1 Q Camtninee I�l:;uncif /' Inkia](Mite InitiaMate Wtittallpatt COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:N/A Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of the proposed resolution." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—4/2019 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 16, 2019 TO: City Council Members VIA: Jim Ferrell, Mayor FROM: J. Ryan Call, City Attorney SUBJECT: Approval to place an emergency medical services levy proposal on the November 5, 2019 ballot Financial Impacts: Approval to place the emergency medical services levy proposal on the November ballot is not expected to result in any increase or decrease in expenditures or revenue by the City. Background Information: Council already adopted a very similar resolution on June 4, 2019 to approve placing a 27-cent EMS levy on the ballot. But King County now plans to use a lower rate when they put the issue on the ballot making the June 4th resolution ineffective. The County initially proposed a levy rate of 27 cents per $1,000 assessed value and sent materials to the City showing that rate. Later, the County updated its financial plan using the King County Economist's March financial forecast, which showed it could cover its expenditures with a 26.5-cent levy. Washington counties are authorized to impose additional regular property tax levies for the provision of emergency medical care or emergency medical services (EMS) if approved by the voters. RCW 84.52.069(2). King County has imposed such a levy since 1980 to fund EMS. The current EMS program, Medic One, includes 9-1-1 dispatchers who provide over-the-phone life-saving instructions, firefighters trained as emergency medical technicians, paramedics who provide advanced life support, and transportation to hospitals. Placing the countywide levy on the ballot will require the approval of at least 75% of the cities with population over fifty thousand within the county because a countywide levy prevents individual cities within that county from levying such a tax themselves. RCW 84.52.069(6). See the attached staff report by King County for additional background information on the Medic One/Emergency Medical Services (EMS) system. Rev.7/18 King County Metropolitan King County Council Budget and Fiscal Management Committee STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 5 & 6 Name: Miranda Leskinen Sam Porter 2019-0185.1 Proposed No.: 2019-0186.2 Date: June 25, 2019 SUBJECT: 2019-0185: An Ordinance relating to placement of a proposition on the November 5, 2019 ballot to authorize a six-year property tax levy to support countywide Medic One/Emergency Medical Services to residents of Seattle and King County through a regional response system. 2019-0186: An Ordinance relating to approval of the 2020-2025 Medic One/Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Strategic Plan. SUMMARY: The King County Medic One/EMS system is primarily funded with a countywide, voter- approved EMS levy. The current EMS levy expires at the end of 2019. Proposed Ordinance 2019-0185, if approved, would place on the November 5, 2019 ballot a proposition authorizing a six-year property tax levy that would generate approximately $1.1 billion in levy proceeds during the levy period to support the King County Medic One/EMS system. The initial levy rate is proposed at $0.265 per $1,000 assessed valuation (AV) based on the March 2019 economic forecast. For the owner of a home with a $500,000 AV, the annual levy cost would be $133 (at $0.265 per $1,000 AV). (For comparison, at the current EMS levy rate in 2019 of $0.218 per $1,000 AV, the cost for the same home owner would be $109 for 2020). Proposed Ordinance 2019-0186, if approved, would accept and approve the 2020- 2025 EMS Strategic Plan, which is the primary policy and financial document that would direct the Medic One/EMS system from 2020 to 2025 and forms the basis for the renewal EMS levy proposal, Proposed Ordinance 2019-0185, that the Council would ask voters to approve. ' Per RCW 82.52.069, a majority of at least three-fourths of cities over 50,000 in population must approve the levy proposal in order for a countywide EMS levy to be placed on the ballot. Of note, the transmitted EMS Strategic Plan reflected a $0.270 levy rate and projected revenues based on the August 2018 economic forecast. An amendment to the transmitted ordinance was adopted at the June 12th RPC meeting; the adopted amendment replaced the transmitted Strategic Plan with an updated version that aligns with the levy proposal and incorporates clarification and typographical corrections. The Regional Policy Committee (RPC) took action on the legislation at its June 12th meeting, recommending Proposed Ordinance 2019-0185.1 and Proposed Ordinance 2019-0186.2 for adoption. This legislation is now before the Budget and Fiscal Management (BFM) Committee. The BFM Committee received an initial briefing (disCLlsSlon only) on the transmitted renewal EMS levy proposal and Strategic Plan at its June 11''' meeting. BACKGROUND: King County EMS System. King County's Medic One/Emergency Medical Services (EMS) system provides residents of Seattle and King County with life-saving prehospital medical care through an internationally recognized tiered regional response system. This system relies upon coordinated partnerships with fire departments, paramedic agencies, dispatch centers and hospitals. Of note, the City of Seattle operates and funds a Medic One emergency services program that is separate from the county program but is part of the regional EMS delivery system. All EMS levy proceeds collected from taxable property within the City of Seattle are reimbursed and transferred to the City, per an Interlocal agreement between the County and City, and used solely for the Seattle Medic One EMS program, which is coordinated through the Seattle Fire Department. As indicated in the 2018 EMS annual report, the use of a tiered response system ensures the most appropriate care provider responds to each 9-1-1 call. The tiered regional Medic One/EMS system consists of five major components: 1. EMS System Access: A patient or bystander accesses the Medic One/ EMS system by calling 9-1-1 for medical assistance. Bystanders' reactions and rapid responses to the scene can greatly impact the chances of patient survival. 2. Dispatcher Triage- Calls to 9-1-1 are received and triaged by professional dispatchers who determine the most appropriate level of care needed. Dispatchers are trained to provide pre-arrival instructions for most medical emergencies and guide the caller through life-saving steps, including Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Automated External Defibrillator (AED) instructions, until the Medic One/EMS provider arrives. 3. First Tier Response - Basic Life Support (BLS): BLS personnel, usually first to arrive on scene, provide immediate basic life support medical care that includes advanced first aid and CPR/AED to stabilize the patient.2 Staffed by firefighters trained as Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs), EMTs are employed by 29 fire-based agencies across King County. EMTs are certified by the state and are required to complete initial and ongoing training. 2 Community Medical Technician (CMT) units may be dispatched to respond to low-acuity calls. 4. Second Tier Response - Advanced_Life Support (ALS): Paramedics respond to about 25 percent of all calls and usually arrive second on scene to provide emergency care for critical or life threatening injuries and illness. Regional paramedic services are provided by five agencies operating 26 Advanced Life Support (ALS) units throughout King County, including fire departments in Bellevue, Redmond, Shoreline, Seattle, and King County Medic One (KCM1, which operates in south King County).3 4 Paramedics receive more than 2,500 hours of intensive training through the University of Washington/Harborview Medical Center Paramedic Training Program. 5. Transport to Hospitals: Once a patient is stabilized, it is determined whether transport to a hospital or clinic for further medical attention is needed. Transport is most often provided by an ALS agency, BLS agency, private ambulance, or taxi for lower-acuity situations. In addition to these components of the system, King County EMS oversees strategic initiatives and regional services. These core programs and services, managed by the EMS Division of Public Health — Seattle and King County, further provide for regional coordination and consistent quality across all jurisdictions in King County. These services include program supervision, BLS EMT staff training, dispatch training, medical data collection and analysis, financial oversight, contract administration, and division management. EMS regularly integrates initiatives that are aimed at preventing/reducing emergency calls and improving the quality of the services. Additionally, the EMS Advisory Committee, which has provided advisory support to the EMS Division since 1997 on regional Medic One/EMS policies and practices in King County, monitors the uniformity and consistency of the Medic One system. Funding of EMS Services. The Medic One/EMS system is primarily funded with a countywide, voter-approved EMS levy. State law authorizes EMS levies and stipulates that revenues collected may only be used for EMS operations and support purposes.' This type of levy is considered an excess levy and is collected outside the $1.80 limit for county taxing authority and the $5.90 limit for the maximum aggregate rate of $5.90 per $1,000 of assessed value for counties, cities, fire districts, library districts and certain other junior taxing districts6. In other words, an EMS levy does not impact the capacity of taxing districts whose levies are collected within the $5.90 limit. Current state law permits EMS levies to be approved for six years, ten years, or on a permanent basis. EMS levies in King County have typically been approved for six-year periods. Past levy periods and rates are shown in Table 1. 3 A contract with Snohomish County Fire District 26 provides EMS services to the Skykomish and King County Fire District 50 area, from Baring to Stevens Pass. 4 Ordinance 18479, enacted in March 2017, approved a Memorandum of Agreement(MOA) regarding the merger of Vashon Island's advanced life support paramedic services into the KCM1 program, and Ordinance 18495, enacted in April 2017, approved a corresponding transition MOA. 5 RCW 84.52.069(5) states that "Any tax imposed under this section[RCW 84.52.069]may be used only for the provision of emergency medical care or emergency medical services, including related personnel costs, training for such personnel, and related equipment, supplies, vehicles and structures needed for the provision of emergency medical care or emergency medical services." 6 RCW 84.52.043 Table 1. EMS Levy Histo 1 PeriodLevy Rate . - 000 AV 2014 - 2019 $0.335 2008 -2013 $0.30 2002 - 2007 $0.25 1999 -200 17 $0.29 1992 - 1997 $0.25 1986 - 1991 $0.25 1980 - 1985 $0.21 2014.2019 EMS levy. The current EMS levy was approved by voters in November 2013 at a levy rate not to exceed 33.5 cents per $1,000 Assessed Valuation (AV). Levy revenues for the 2014-2019 EMS levy are anticipated to total approximately $732.7 million over the six-year collection period, providing annual revenues of approximately $113.5 million (2014 collections) to $131.5 million (2019 projected collections, based on March 2019 OEFA forecast). Annual8 levy amounts and rates for the current levy are identified in Table 2.9 Table 2. 2014-2019 EMS Levy Annual Tax Collections Per the March 2019 OEFA Forecast 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Amount $113,541,015 $116,769,207 $119,879,727 $123,483,769 $127,489,160 $131,539,324 Rate 50.335 $0.302 $0.282 $0.263 $0.239 $0.218 F-7) " I 1 • • • lY The 2014-2019 EMS levy expires December 31, 2019. EMS Levy Renewal Planning. Overseeing the development and vetting of the Medic One/EMS levy is the EMS Advisory Task Force. This 20-body group consists of elected officials from the county, cities, and fire districts, representing those who administer, authorize and are served by the system. The task force was charged with reviewing and endorsing Medic One/EMS program recommendations and a supporting levy rate. The EMS Advisory Task Force convened on January 18, 2018, beginning the levy renewal planning process. The task force formed four subcommittees to conduct the bulk of the program and cost analyses. The subcommittees concentrated on the different program areas of Advanced Life Support (ALS), Basic Life Support (BLS), Regional Services, and Finance. Each subcommittee, chaired by an EMS Advisory Task Force member and comprised of subject matter experts from all aspects of the Medic One/EMS system, met regularly to determine how the programs would ensure the region can continue to provide world- 7 In the fall of 1997, voters failed to approve a six-year levy for Medic One. In February 1998, a three- year EMS levy was approved by the voters, which provided for the second half of 1998 expenditures and for the ensuing three years (1999-2001). 8 Factoring in a one percent undercollection rate. 9 These calculations exclude the City of Milton, as the portion of the city within King County is excluded from the county's EMS levy through an exemption in state law(RCW 84.52.069(10)). class emergency medical services. Subcommittees reported back to the task force every two or three months. In addition, subcommittees involved both the ALS and BLS Working Groups, seeking their review and insight regarding some of the more complex issues. At its September 18, 2018 meeting, the task force voted to adopt final programmatic and financial recommendations that informed the EMS Strategic Plan and renewal levy proposal transmitted to Council by the Executive. Task Force Recommendations. The Task Force-recommended financial plan, based on the August 2018 economic forecast, would support a six-year EMS budget (2020-2025) with a levy rate of 27 cents per $1,000 Assessed Valuation (AV). (As noted earlier, the levy rate was subsequently revised to 26.5 cents by the Executive to reflect updated financial projections.) An overview of the recommendations from the task force subcommittees is provided in Table 3. Table 3. Task Force Subcommittee Recommendations ALS 1. Continue using the unit allocation to fully fund Advanced Life Support 2. Include a placeholder for adding a potential future unit 3. Explore options to address paramedic workforce needs and other efficiencies BLS 4. Continue the Basic Life Support allocation; streamline the BLS funding sources and distribute it using agencies' current assessed valuations and service levels 5. Commit $4 million a year of levy funding to exploring a Mobile Integrated Healthcare model to address community needs that would be available to all agencies 6. Establish guidelines to create consistency around data collection, measures and program reporting Regional 7. Continue delivering programs that provide essential support to the Services system & 8. Maintain regional focus on creating additional efficiencies and system Strategic effectiveness to improve patient care and outcomes Initiatives g. Support strategic initiatives that leverage previous investments made by the region to improve patient care and outcomes (e.g. Vulnerable Populations Strategic Initiatives, etc.) Finance 10.Support financial policies that provide stability to the system by: o Adapting existing reserve policies to meet county financial policies o Incorporating sufficient reserves to mitigate unforeseen financial risk o Pursuing an EMS levy length that ensures sufficient funding 11.Support a financial plan that includes a 6-year budget of $1.1 billion with a 27-cent EMS levy to the Task Force for consideration and adoption (As noted earlier, the levy rate was subsequently revised to 26.5 cents by the Executive to reflect updated financial projections.) 2020-2025 EMS Renewal Levy Proposal (PO 2019-0185) - Overview The transmitted levy proposal (Proposed Ordinance 2019-0185) would support a six- year EMS budget (2020-2025) of $1.1 billion10 with a levy rate of 26.5 cents per $1,000 Assessed Valuation (AV). Again, this is lower than the 27 cents per $1,000 AV levy rate recommended by the EMS Advisory Task Force. As indicated in the Executive's transmittal letter to PO 2019-0185, when the financial plan was updated using the most recent economic forecast (March 2019), it resulted in a levy rate that is less than the Task Force recommendation (which was based on the August 2018 forecast). As further indicated, although lower, the 26.5 cent levy rate "fully supports the programmatic and fiscal proposals that were developed and supported by the region, endorsed by the EMS Advisory Task Force on September 18, 2018, and affirmed in the Medic One/EMS 2020-2025 Strategic Plan". The 2020-2025 EMS proposed levy is expected to generate approximately $1.1 billion over the six-year collection period based on the March 2019 OEFA forecast, assuming a 26.5-cent levy, with an annual levy rate projected to vary frons 26.5 cents to a low of approximately 23.4 cents11. As earlier noted, due to the limitations of state law12 total property tax collections in the county cannot exceed an increase of more than 1 percent per year plus new construction; if AV were to grow at a rate higher than one percent, as is projected over the life of the proposed levy, the levy rate would reduce to not exceed the allowed arnOLInt under state law. The estimated annual net13 levy amounts and rates for each of the six years are identified in Table 4.14 Table 4. Estimated Net Tax Collections for Proposed EMS Levy at 26.5 Cents per March 2019 Economic Forecast (Executive Proposal) 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Amount $172.185 M $176.727 M $180.849 M $184.910 M $188.980 M $193.077 M Rate S0265 $0.257 $0.256 S0248 $0.242 S0 234 ISA , I 1 1 • d Summary of Levy Proposal Sections. Proposed Ordinance 2019-0185 consists of twelve sections as follows: SECTION 1. Approval of cities over 50,000 in population. Section 1 indicates that, per RCW 84.52.069, approval to place this countywide EMS levy proposal on the November 5, 2019 ballot will be obtained from the legislative authority of a majority of at least three-fourths of cities over 50,000 in population..1516 10 Consistent with Task Force Recommendation#11 in Table 3 of this staff report. 11 This corrects a typo from the May 8, 2019 RPC Staff Report. 12 Chapter 84.55 RCW. 13 Factoring in a one percent undercollection rate. 14 These calculations exclude the City of Milton, as the portion of the city within King County is excluded from the county's EMS levy through an exemption in state law(RCW 84.52.069(10)). 15 Prior to a 2018 change in state law (Chapter 136, Laws of 2018), approval to place a countywide EMS levy proposal on the ballot was required from every city in the county with a population in excess of 50,000. 'G Cities in King County with a population over 50,000: Auburn, Bellevue, Burien, Federal Way, Kent, Kirkland, Redmond, Renton, Sammamish, Seattle and Shoreline. SECTION 2. Definitions. The following are defined terms in the proposed ordinance, which are defined the same for the 2014-2019 levy: County: Refers to King County. Levy: The levy of regular property taxes, for the specific purpose and term provided in this ordinance and authorized by the electorate in accordance with state law. Levy Proceeds: The principal amount of monies raised by the levy, any interest earnings on the funds and the proceeds of any interim financing following authorization of the levy. SECTION 3. City of Seattle reimbursement'. Section 3 identifies that the City of Seattle operates and funds a Medic One emergency services program that is separate from the county program but is part of the regional delivery system, and directs that all EMS levy proceeds collected from taxable property located within the legal boundaries of the City of Seattle shall be reimbursed and transferred to the city and used solely for the Seattle Medic One EMS program in accordance with RCW 84.52.069. SECTION 4. Levy_ submittal to voters. Section 4 specifies the levy period as six consecutive years, with collection beginning in 2020 at a rate not to exceed $0.265 per $1,000 AV. This section also states that this levy is exempt from the rate limitations under RCW 84.52.043, but that it is subject in years two through six to the limitations imposed under chapter 84.55 RCW. SECTION 5. Deposit of_lev ry proceeds. Section 5 specifies that except for the levy proceeds transferred to the City of Seattle under Section 3 of this ordinance, all levy proceeds would be deposited in to the county EMS Fund. SECTION 6. Eligible Expenditures. Section 6 specifies that, if approved by voters, all proceeds of the levy authorized in this ordinance would be used in accordance with RCW 84.52.069 (Emergency Medical Care and Service Levies). SECTION 7. Call for special election. Section 7 calls for a special election to be held in conjunction with the general election on November 5, 2019. This section also includes draft ballot measure language. SECTION 8. Interlocal agreement. Section 8 indicates that the County Executive is authorized and directed to enter into an Interlocal agreement with the City of Seattle relating to the Medic One program, to implement the provisions of Section 3 of this ordinance. Of note, the current ILA expires at the end of 2019, so a new ILA would be transmitted for County Council approval (subsequent to Seattle City Council approval). Of historical note, all levy proceeds collected in Seattle are reimbursed and transferred to the city per an agreement with the county in place since the establishment of the countywide EMS levy. All other levy proceeds are deposited into the county Emergency Medical Services Fund, which is also identified in Section 5 of PO 2019-0185 (Deposit of Levy Proceeds). SECTION 9. Local voters',pamphlet. Section 9 indicates that the Director of Elections is authorized and requested to prepare and distribute a local voters' pamphlet, pursuant to K.C.C. 1.10.010, for the special election called for in the ordinance. This section specifies that the cost of the pamphlet is to be included as part of the cost of the election. SECTION 10. Exemption. Section 10 states that the property taxes authorized by the levy would be included in the real property tax exemption program authorized by RCW 84.36.381, which exempts some seniors, disabled individuals and veterans, if that statute is amended by the state legislature during the term of the levy. SECTION 11. Ratification. Section 11 ratifies and confirms certification of the proposition by the Council Clerk to the Director of Elections. SECTION 12. Severability. Section 12 states that if any provision of the ordinance is held invalid, the remaining provisions or the application of the provisions to other persons or circumstances would not be affected. 2020-2025 Proposed EMS Strategic Plan — (PO 2019-0186) Overview The EMS Strategic Plan is the primary policy and financial document, based on the recommendations of the EMS Advisory Task Force, that would direct the Medic One/EMS system from 2020 to 2025 and forms the basis for the renewal levy proposal that the Council would ask voters to approve to support the EMS system for 2020-2025. As stated in Proposed Ordinance 2019-0186, which would accept and approve the 2020-2025 EMS Strategic Plan, the recommendations contained in the Strategic Plan would inform and update the provision of emergency medical services throughout King County during 2020-2025. Throughout the levy period, if approved by voters, members of the EMS Advisory Committee would convene on a quarterly basis to review implementation of the Strategic Plan and other proposals, including strategic initiatives and medic unit recommendations. NOTE: The transmitted EMS Strategic Plan reflected a $0.270 levy rate and projected revenues based on the August 2018 economic forecast. An amendment to the transmitted ordinance was adopted at the June 12th RPC meeting, which replaced the transmitted Strategic Plan with an updated version that aligns with the levy proposal and incorporated clarification and typographical corrections. The proposed 2020-2025 Strategic Plan recommends spending County EMS levy funds in 2020-2025 in the following main areas: % of KC EMS Expenditures Advanced Life Support Services (ALS) 55.7% Basic Life Support Services (BLS), including Mobile Integrated Healthcare (MIH) 25.1% Regional Support Services (RS) 11.9% Strategic Initiatives (SI) 1.0% Reserves 6.3% Advanced Life Support (ALS). As of 2018, there are 26 medic units in Seattle and King County managed by five area agencies, four of which are fire-based with firefighters trained as paramedics and one (KCM1) that operates as a paramedic-only agency.$ The standard unit allocation is the basis for funding each full-time, 24-hour medic unit. As indicated in the transmitted Strategic Plan, this allocation model is based on covering ALS-related expenses to prevent cost-shifting to agencies, and was developed to ensure a fair and equitable distribution of funds across agencies. As further indicated, annual comparison of costs on a unit basis allows the region to understand differences between agencies, share efficiencies or identify potential new costs being experienced early by one or two agencies, which help document and justify ALS allocation costs and evaluate if the allocation is fully covering eligible program costs. Total projected ALS service expenses during the 2020-2025 levy period are approximately $519.2 million. 18 Units may respond to areas where the municipal boundaries or the fire agency's response district crosses into neighboring counties. As indicated in the Strategic Plan, if service into these areas exceeds established levels, the receiving jurisdictions reimburses for such services as outlined in EMS policies. Basic Life Support (BLS). The EMS levy, since the first levy, has provided BLS agencies with an allocation to help offset costs of providing EMS services. Agencies use the allocation to pay for a variety of EMS-specific items including personnel, equipment and supplies. Total projected BLS service expenses during the 2020-2025 levy period are approximately $442.8 million. _Mobile Integrated Healthcare (MIH). The proposed Strategic Plan additionally recommends, consistent with the Task Force BLS Subcommittee, committing levy funds to exploration of a MIH model to address community needs region wide. As outlined in the proposed Strategic Plan, it is intended that levy funding for MIH to support approaches that facilitate appropriate cross-linkages between individuals accessing 9-1-1 and broader healthcare settings and resources. In addition to emergency and urgent healthcare services (including urgent care), the Plan describes that this approach may include referrals and activities coordinating with primary care, behavioral healthcare, sobering facilities, fall prevention services, and other complementary services to mitigate future 9-1-1 utilization. Total projected MIH service expenses during the 2020-2025 levy period are approximately $26.3 million. Regional Services & Strategic Initiatives (RS/SI). Regional Services and Strategic Initiatives, which are overseen by the EMS Division of Public Health, support the direct services activities and key elements of the Medic One/EMS system. Examples of regional services include standardized EMT and emergency dispatch training, EMT and paramedic continuing education, collective paramedic service planning, and administrative support and financial management of the regional EMS Levy Fund.19 Strategic initiatives include pilot programs and operations aimed to improve the quality of system services and manage the growth and cost of the system. As indicated in the transmitted Strategic Plan, strategic initiatives have the potential (upon successful completion) be incorporated into Regional Services as ongoing programs. According to the transmitted Plan, the EMS Division worked with various stakeholders to develop particular proposals and bring ideas back to the Task Force RS Subcommittee for review, and that all subcommittees were updated as proposals evolved. Total projected expenses during the 2020-2025 levy period are approximately $78.9 million for Regional Services expenses and approximately $6.7 million for Strategic Initiatives expenses. A list of RS activities planned for the 2020-2025 levy, if approved, is provided in Appendix A of the proposed Strategic Plan. 19 The EMS Division of PHSKC is responsible for managing the levy fund in accordance with the EMS Strategic Plan, the EMS Financial Plan, EMS financial policies, and ordinances and motions as adopted by the County Council. EMS Division responsibilities include the review and evaluation of allocations, and the management of RS/SI, contingencies and reserves as reflected in the Strategic Plan, the EMS Financial Plan and associated County ordinances. A summary of programmatic recommendations from the proposed 2020-2025 EMS Strategic Plan is provided in Table 5. Table 5. 2020-2025 EMS Strategic Plan Programmatic Recommendations Summary ProgramConsistent with % Task Force ALS in Table 3 Starting levy span with 26 medic units: • 19 medic units - King County ■ 7 medic units - Seattle 0 additional units planned $11.6 million "placeholder" reserve in the event service demands require additional units over the span of the proposed levy Determine costs using a revised unit allocation methodology consisting of: • Unit Cost Allocation of direct paramedic services costs (salaries, benefits, medical supplies, pharmaceuticals, vehicle O&M, etc.) • Program Administration Allocation includes costs related to the management and supervision of direct paramedic services • ALS System Cost Allocation addresses costs that can vary during the levy period such as retirements— note that 30% of EMS workforce is eligible to retire in 2019 Equipment allocation for equipment with a lifespan of more than one year 1-3 & 10 (vehicles, defibrillators, stretchers, coms equipment, etc.) Average Unit Allocation over span of levy is $3.2 million20 4 Reserve/Contingency categories to cover unanticipated, one-time expenses • Operational Contingencies (Budgeted under ALS): ALS Operational Reserves with limited access for Regional Services, $1 M/yr. • Expenditure Reserves: ALS Capacity; Equipment/Vehicles • Rainy Day: 90 days expenses, Disaster response & risk abatement; can replenish expenditure reserves • Rate Stabilization: Available to replenish Rainy Day Reserve and address reduced revenue above Rainy Day Reserve funding Equipment allocation: 8-year medic unit life cycle (4 years primary, 4 years back-up). ALS equipment inflator is proposed as the Transportation Equipment Producer Price Index. BLS Pro.ram Allocations Allocate funds to BLS agencies using methodology that is based on 50% Assessed Valuation and 50% Call Volumes; use updated data that better reflects agencies' current Assessed Valuation and service levels; increase funding to ensure consistency in the first year. 4 & 6 Consolidate the funding for the BLS Core Services program and the BLS Training and QI Initiative with the allocation to simplify contract administration; maintain designated programmatic funding and usage requirements. 20 This is a $0.9 million increase in the average unit allocation from the 2014-2019 EMS levy. As indicated by executive staff, the increase is attributable to inflation; increased funding for management and supervision of direct paramedic services; and increased funding related to retirements, hiring and training of new paramedic staff(related to forecasts of retirement eligibility). . . Transitions the funding from the EMS Efficiencies & Evaluation Studies, and Community Medical Technician into MIH exploration. Distributes $4 million each year across all agencies using the BLS allocation methodology 5 of 50% AV and 50% call volumes for the first year, and inflates each agency's funding in the subsequent years of the levyby CPI-W+ 1%. - �' • o . . • Fund regional services that focus on superior medical training, oversight and improvement; innovative programs and strategies, regional leadership, effectiveness and efficiencies. Move BLS Core Services program out of Regional Services budget and into BLS allocation Convert or integrate 5 Strategic Initiatives with other programs to supplement system performance. Explore a Mobile Integrated Healthcare, or MIH, model to address community needs: - Convert BLS Efficiencies into ongoing programs -Transition E&E into MIH exploration 7-9 - Convert RMS into ongoing programs - Integrate the BLS Training and QI SI into the BLS allocation Support existing and new Strategic Initiatives that leverage previous investments made to improve patient care and outcomes: - Continue implementing next stages of Vulnerable Populations (VPSI)21 - $2.OM - Develop 2 new Initiatives: AEIOU22 - $1.8M and STRIVE 23 - $2.9M Transition Community Medical Technician into MIH exploration Provide regular updates to past audit recommendations All programs, except for the ALS equipment allocation, are proposed to be increased by the local CPI-W+ 1%. ALS equipment inflator is proposed as the Producer Price Index. 21 The VPSI, as described in the Strategic Plan, seeks opportunities to improve interactions between EMS and vulnerable populations, such as the elderly or persons with limited English proficiency. For 2020- 2025, the Strategic Plan recommends continuing outreach efforts with community partners and fire departments. Additionally, the initiative proposes enhancing support to Equity and Social Justice work related to workforce diversity and to regional activities relating to improving mental wellness among EMS providers by continuing current outreach and education efforts (e.g. trainings, supporting pilot studies and ensuring access to programs on the regional and local levels). 22 The AEIOU, as described in the proposed Strategic Plan, addresses the challenge and need to leverage the electronic data record to generate meaningful clinical information intended to improve patient care. According to Executive staff, AEIOU would build upon the technological work accomplished over the past decade to enhance the integration across dispatch, EMS agencies and hospital data. Of note the timeline for implementation has yet to be determined due to dependencies on a number of other partners. 23 As described in the proposed EMS Strategic Plan, STRIVE would modernize the online KC EMS continuing medical education platform to meet the changing needs of the el-earning environment. Executive staff indicate that the current online platform is outdated, and does not meet the learning management needs of the region. As further indicated, this initiative includes plans to assess the current needs of EMS partners and upgrade or update the EMS Online system to better integrate as a region. Financials — Overview. Reserves. The Finance subcommittee, as part of its analyses, looked at the recommendations within the perspective of the levy planning economic environment, economic forecasts, and the potential for changes in the economic forecasts (analyses of `what if' scenarios to evaluate how changes to the proposed revenue and expenditures could impact the system's ability to weather an economic downturn).24 As indicated in the proposed Strategic Plan, subcommittee members unanimously agreed that the Financial Plan must include adequate reasonable reserves and contingencies to fund unanticipated or one-time costs, and supported preparing for a potential economic downturn by fully funding programmatic and County required Rainy Day Reserves (90-day funding), with any additional funding placed in Rate Stabilization Reserves to supplement existing reserves and/or be used to buy down a future levy rate. The proposed Financial Plan includes $41.6 million in programmatic reserves and estimated $9.2 million supplemental reserves with a 26.5 cents levy. Proposed Financial Policy Changes. The proposed 2020-2025 financial plan incorporates changes made by the EMS Division in late 2017 to modify the reserve categories established in the 2014-2019 EMS Strategic Plan in order to be consistent with updated County Financial Policies (e.g. instituting a 90-day Rainy Day Fund equaling 90 days of expenditures). Additionally, the proposed 2020-2025 Financial Plan includes financial policy recommendations from the Task Force Finance Subcommittee to convert ALS Operating Reserves into Operating Contingencies and reconfigure the ALS Operating Allocation into three distinct parts (unit cost allocation, program administration allocation and system cost allocation) to better accommodate different types of costs and enhance full funding (refer also to Table 5).25 Revenues. The proposed 2020-2025 EMS Financial Plan is based on an EMS property tax levy as the primary source of funding. The revenue forecast is built on assumptions including the forecast assessed valuation (AV), new construction, and a 99 percent collection (factors in a one percent delinquency/undercollection rate). Revenues, consistent with County financial policies, are forecast at a 65 percent confident [eve 1.26 Other considerations include the division of property tax revenues between the City of Seattle and the County EMS Levy Fund (shown in Table 6), interest income on fund balance, and other revenues27 received by property tax funds at King County. Of note, revenue needs were reduced by including carryover related to reserves of approximately $20 million from the 2014-2019 EMS Financial Plan (shown in Table 7). 24 As noted in the transmitted Strategic Plan, since the City of Seattle funds reserves separately from EMS levy funds, the Finance Subcommittee focused on appropriate reserves for the County EMS Levy Fund. 25 While the process for approving and accessing EMS reserves funds is proposed to remain the same for 2020-2025, a streamlined process is recommended for approving and accessing contingency funds, whereby ALS contingency requests would proceed to the ALS Working Group for its review and recommendation to the EMS Division Director. The Director could either approve or forward requests to the EMSAC Financial Subcommittee and EMSAC for their review. For other contingency requests, both the Division Director and the EMSAC Financial Subcommittee would review the requests. Requests requiring additional appropriation authority would require Council approval. 26 Confidence level is defined as the chance that actual revenues will meet or exceed forecasted levels. 27 In addition to income on the KC EMS Fund balance, other misc. revenues include County revenues distributed proportionately to property tax funds, such as lease and timber tax revenues. Please note that Tables 6 and 7 are reflective of an updated EMS financial plan, dated May 30, 2019 that includes estimated revenues and supplemental reserves based on the March 2019 economic forecast and a 26.5 cents levy rate. Table 6. 2020-2025 Forecast Net28 Property Tax Revenue per Financial Plan, dated May 30, 2019 (in millions; 26.5 cents levy rate) Note: Forecast revenue about 1 percent is due to new construction 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Total City of $70.4 $72.5 $74.4 $76.4 $78.3 $80.1 $452.1 Seattle Proportion) 40.9% 41.0% 41.2% 41.3% 41.4% 41.5% - KC EMS 1 $101.8 $104.2 $106.4 $108.5 $110.7 $113.0 $644.6 Fund Proportion 59.1% 59.0% 58.8% 58.7% 58.6% 58.5% - Annual Growth in - 2.6% 2.3% 2.3% 2.2% 2.2% - Total Levy Expenditures. EMS expenditures, as described in the proposed Strategic Plan, are based on the recommendations of the Task Force subcommittees and are inflated yearly based on forecasts from the County Office of Economic and Financial Analysis (OEFA), and reserves and contingencies are based on programmatic needs and updated for compliance with current County financial policies. Anticipated revenues and expenditures to support EMS programs and reserves for 2020-2025 are summarized in Table 7. 28 Factoring in a one percent undercollection rate. Table 7. 2020-2025 EMS Projected Revenues, Expenditures and Reserves per Financial Plan, dated May 30, 2019 (in millions; 26.5 cents levy rate) Revenues MI;11,,, Seattle 29 County, 2020-2025 Property tax forecast $452.1 $644.6 $1,096.7 Other revenue (KC EMS Fund) $8.0 $8.0 Carryforward reserves from 2014-2019 ( $20.0 $20.0 Total Revenues $452.1 $672.6 $1,124.7 EVenditures ALS $149.1 $370.1 $519.2 BLS $302.2 $140.6 $442.8 Mobile Integrated Healthcare (MIH) $26.3 $26.3 Regional Services $78.9 $78.9 Strategic Initiatives $6.7 $6.7 Total Expenditures $451.3 $622.6 $1,073.9 12 ALS Reserves $13.8 $13.8 ........ .......... Rate Stabilization Reserves Rainy day fund (90 day) _ $27.8 $27.8 Total Programmatic Reserves $41.61 $41.6 Next Steps and Key Dates The following are key dates this year by which the RPC and Council must complete their respective review processes and the Council must pass legislation to place a levy renewal proposal before the voters in 2019 for their approval.ss, sa Deadlines for the general ballot on November 5, 2019: Last regular council meeting with minimum processing time (10 days) is July 24"d Last regular council meeting to pass as emergency is July 3151 Last special council meeting to pass as emergency is August 6th Elections Division deadline for receiving effective ordinance is August 6th The Regional Policy Committee (RPC) took action on the legislation at its June 12th meeting, recommending Proposed Ordinance 2019-0185.1 and Proposed Ordinance 29 The City of Seattle, as described in the proposed Strategic Plan, places all funds not targeted for ALS into BLS; other city funds are used for programs (e.g. Health One Pilot Program) similar to those in the KC EMS Fund. 30 Typo correction from May 8, 2019 RPC staff report. 3' Note: Reserves roll over year-to-year during the levy period. 32 Includes$1 M for ALS equipment to cover unplanned/unforeseen costs related to equipment, and $12.8M for ALS capacity (including $1.2M for costs relating to avoiding adding new units and $11.6M as a placeholder for new units). '" Council Clerk's memorandum on Deadlines for Adoption of Ballot Measures in 2019 (Attachment 9) 34 State law (RCW 84.52.069) requires a simple majority (no less than 51 percent) voter approval for renewal of a six-year or ten-year EMS levy. 2019-0186.2 for adoption. This legislation is now before the Budget and Fiscal Management (BFM) Committee. The BFM Committee received an initial briefing (diSCUSSion only) on the transmitted renewal EMS levy proposal and Strategic Plan at its June '11'_h meeting. Following action at the Budget and Fiscal Management Committee, the legislation would be considered by the full Council. If there are any changes by the committee or by the full Council resulting in a new version of the legislation not previously considered by RPC, the new version would need to be re-referred to the RPC for subsequent consideration. It is important to again note that current state law requires that a majority of at least three-fourths of cities over 50,000 in population must approve the levy proposal in order for a countywide EMS levy to be placed on the ballot.35 This requirement is usually accomplished by each city passing a resolution endorsing the levy; the City of Seattle usually supports the levy by passing legislation approving an Interlocal agreement with King County to provide EMS services. Executive staff have indicated that they will work with the cities on this process, and that this work is done concomitantly with the legislative process at the County Council. Status of Approval by Cities over 50,040 in Papulation (as of 6/18/19). Of the eleven cities in King County with a population over 50,000, EMS Division staff indicate that eight (73%) of these cities have already approved legislation endorsing the levy (Auburn, Bellevue, Burien, Federal Way, Kent, Redmond, Sammamish and Shoreline). Renton City Council received an EMS briefing on May 20th. Seattle is anticipated to take action on legislation on June 24th, and Kirkland is anticipated to take action on legislation on July 2,d. Responses from the EMS Division to Committee Questions from June, 11 2019 BFM Meeting 1. How much of BLS is paid for through the EMS levy vs. what the cities are contributing? Has this increased since Councilmember Lambert was involved in the planning process? If so, how? Response: Since its inception, the regional Medic One/EMS levy has provided BLS agencies with funding to help offset costs of providing EMS services. This allocation was developed as a way to recognize and support BLS for its significant role in our tiered system and was never intended to fully fund BLS services. According to an audit performed by the King County Auditor in 201136, BLS services comprise approximately 70 percent of the EMS annual call volume. Despite it being such a large amount of calls, it is difficult to separate the cost of providing BLS services from the cost of providing fire suppression and other services. This is because fire agencies provide BLS services and use the same personnel, equipment, and administrative systems to provide fire suppression and BLS services. However, in 2011, the King County Auditor determined that EMS levy funding represented approximately " RCVV 84 52.069(6) 36 King County Auditor's Office—Financial Review& Compliance Audit of 2011 Emergency Medical Services Levy, page 8. eight percent 37 of the overall King County BLS system costs in 2010. The remaining 92 percent of BLS costs are covered by local fire agencies' revenues. In 2010, the County's allocation supporting BLS services (excluding Seattle) was $15 million, or 26 percent of the County's share of the levy fund. The 2020 proposed financial plan shows that the County's allocation supporting BLS services (excluding Seattle) will be $21.3 million, or 22.5 percent of the County's share of the levy fund. We are uncertain whether the BLS allocation proposed for the 2020-2025 levy span covers a greater share of an agency's total budget, but we do know that the BLS percentage of the levy, and the total level of funding earmarked for BLS agencies, remain similar. 2. How many ambulances need to be replaced over the life of the next levy? How many chassis replacements v. full ambulance replacements? Response: The decision to remount of purchase new vehicles depends on many factors specific to individual vehicles/fleet. In the 2014-2019 levy span, 3 out of 4 providers opted for remounting, rather than purchasing new vehicles. 3. Are all ambulance rides paid by insurance or through EMS funding? How is this determined? Response: The EMS levy pays for the transport of a patient by medic unit (ALS). The EMS levy does not directly pay for the transport of a lower acuity patient by aid unit (BLS). Whether and how to charge for BLS transports is a local fire department decision. There are three options currently used by our BLS partners: o No transport fee: Approximately 20% of our partner agencies do not charge the patient or insurance for transport, covering transport costs on their own via their budget; o Fee for Yransport: Nearly 50% of our partner agencies charge to transport the patient and bill insurance through a 3rd party vendor; and o Contract with private ambUlance: The remaining 30% of our partner agencies contract with a private ambulance company (AMR, TriMed) to transport patients. These ambulance companies then bill private insurance. 4. Is there any money from the EMS levy that pays for training conducted by UW Medicine/Harborview that involves live animals? Response: The EMS levy does not pay for training conducted by UW Medicine/Harborview that involves live animals; that training is paid for by the Medic One Foundation. The EMS levy covers agencies' costs associated with having their personnel in the training. 37 King County Auditor's Office—Financial Review&Compliance Audit of 2011 Emergency Medical Services Levy, page 9. INVITED: 1. Michele Plorde, Director, Emergency Medical Services Division, Public Health — Seattle & King County (PHSKC) 2. Helen Chatalas, Assistant Division Director, Emergency Medical Services Division, PHSKC ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Ordinance 2019-0185.1(EMS levy proposal) 2. Transmittal Letter for 2019-0185 3. Transmitted Fiscal Note for 2019-0185 4. Proposed Ordinance 2019-0186.2 (2020-2025 EMS Strategic Plan) a. 2020-2025 Medic One/EMS Strategic Plan, dated June 12, 2019 5. Transmittal Letter for 2019-0186 6. Transmitted Fiscal Note for 2019-0186 7. Council Clerk's memorandum on Deadlines for Adoption of Ballot Measures in 2019 8. Copies of city-approved legislation endorsing EMS levy, as of June 18, 201938 38 Except Bellevue Resolution 9602, a signed copy of which was not yet available online as of the writing of this staff report. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City of Federal Way, Washington, supporting the countywide ballot proposition for funding the Medic One/Emergency Medical Services (EMS) levy for the period from January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2025, pursuant to RCW 84.52.069. WHEREAS, the delivery of emergency medical services is an essential function of the fire and life safety responsibility of local and regional government; and WHEREAS, the internationally recognized, countywide, tiered Medic One/EMS system in Seattle & King County provides county residents and visitors essential life-saving services throughout the region regardless of location, incident circumstances, day of the week, or time of day; and WHEREAS, it has been to the benefit of the residents of the City of Federal Way to support and participate in the countywide cooperative of delivering Advanced Life Support and Basic Life Support services; and WHEREAS, King County should continue to exercise leadership and assume responsibility for assuring the consistent, standardized, effective and cost efficient development and provision of emergency services throughout the county; and WHEREAS, RCW 84.52.069 provides for countywide emergency medical care and service levies and King County is seeking voter authorization of a six-year Medic One/EMS levy for the period of 2020-2025; and WHEREAS, the emergency medical care and services of the King County Medic One/EMS system are funded by a prior countywide six-year Medic One/EMS levy that expires December 31, 2019; and Resolution No. 19- Page 1 of 3 Rev 1/19 WHEREAS, the EMS Advisory Task Force, created via Executive Order PHL - 0 - 1 - EO, worked collaboratively with regional EMS Stakeholders to develop the Medic One/EMS 2020-2025 Strategic Plan for providing this countywide service, and recommends pursuit of a Medic One/EMS levy, per RCW 84.52.069; with an initial levy rate of 26.5 cents per one thousand dollars assessed value, to fund EMS throughout King County for the next six years; and WHEREAS, the City of Federal Way significantly participated in these discussions throughout the process and was represented on the Task Force; and WHEREAS, in order to continue funding for emergency medical services for six years, RCW 84.52.069 requires that 75% of those cities with a population greater than fifty thousand approve placing the countywide levy proposal on the ballot; and WHEREAS, the City of Federal Way has a population greater than fifty thousand people. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The foregoing recitals are adopted as findings of the City Council. Section 2. The City of Federal Way hereby approves submitting to the voters a ballot proposition for a levy to fund the countywide Medic One/EMS on the ballot in 2019. Section 3. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the Federal Way City Council. RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON this day of , 20«___LL. [signatures to follow] Resolution No. 19- Page 2 of 3 Rev 1/19 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: JIM FERRELL, MAYOR ATTEST: STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM'. J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO.: Resolution No. 19- Page 3 of 3 Rev 1/19 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: Sh ............. ....... CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:APPOINTMENT TO ARTS COMMISSION POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council appoint a current alternate member of the Arts Commission to fill a voting term? COMMITTEE: N/A MEETING DATE: N/A CATEGORY: ❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ® City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Stephanie Courtney, CityClerk DEPT: Mayor's Office Background: The Arts Commission is comprised of nine (9) voting and two (2) alternate members who are appointed by the City Council to serve three-year terms (per FWRC 2.50.030). There is currently one (1) vacant voting position due to commissioner resignation. In accordance with the Council Rules of Procedure 19.10(2), when a position becomes available mid-term the City Council may appoint an alternate commissioner who is serving on that same commission. Alternates who were previously interviewed within twelve months of the vacancy being created do not need to be interviewed again. Current alternate member Joslyn Pocock was interviewed September 4, 2018 and is seeking appointment as a voting member. Options Considered: 1. Appoint Joslyn Pocock as a voting member with a term to expire December 31, 2019. 2. Direct the City Clerk to advertise for additional applicants to the Arts Commission. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: N/A MAYOR APPROVAL: N/A N/A CITY CLERK APPROVAL: , Committee Council hrutal,'Datc Initial/Date Initial/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:N/A PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: `I move to appoint Joslyn Pocock as a voting member of the Arts Commission for a term to expire December 31, 2019." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances 0WI) ORDINANCE# REVISED— 12/2017 RESOLUTION# COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 16,2019 ITEM#: 9a CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: ORDINANCE:RELATING TO THE IMPOSITION OF AN EXCISE TAX ON BUSINESS ACTIVITIES POLICY QUESTION: Should City Council approve the ordinance to amend the excise tax on furnishing solid waste collection activities within Federal Way? COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: July 1,2019 CATEGORY: ❑ Consent ® Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: EJ Walsh,P.E., Public Works Director DEPT: Public Works Attachments: Staff Report Ordinance Options Considered: 1. Approve the proposed ordinance. 2. Reject the proposed ordinance and provide direction to staff. MAYOR'S RECO`**MEND N: Option 1. MAYOR APPROVAL: DIRECTOR APPROVAL: :? r �a Co ince foal iI initial.Da�e (20 Initial/Date Initis I/Date COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:I move to forward the proposed ordinance to First Reading on July 16, 2019. ell Mark KoppafW,Commit[ air J "se Johnson,Committee Member Hoang Tran,Committee Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S): FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE (JULY 16, 2019): "1 move to forward approval of the ordinance to the August 13, 2019 Council Meeting for enactment. " SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE(AUGUST 13,2019): "1 move approval of the proposed ordinance. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL# ❑ DENIED First reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING(ordinances only) ORDINANCE# REVISED—12/2017 RESOLUTION# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1, 2019 TO: City Council VIA: Jim Ferrell,Mayor FROM: EJ Walsh, P.E., Director of Public Works `? SUBJECT: Amendment of an excise tax on business activities related to furnishing solid waste collection FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The current overlay program is funded at a level of$1.5 million per year.This amendment modifies the existing excise tax related to furnishing solid waste collection services and creates an additional dedicated revenue source to be used primarily to maintain,repair and preserve residential streets with any remainder dedicated to other streets within the City. No modification is proposed to the existing collected revenue that is allocated to the general fund. The modification to the excise tax is expected to generate approximately$1.5 million to be dedicated to the overlay in the first year. The modification effective date is September 1, 2020. BACKGROUND: The City of Federal Way Public Works Department maintains a proactive Pavement Management System (PMS)in order to understand the pavement condition and make decisions on how to direct limited resources for pavement preservation and maintenance for over 545 lane miles of roadway. Every section of pavement is visually inspected every two years with defects (e.g. cracks,ruts)quantified in order to determine the sections Pavement Condition Index (PCI).The PMS records the pavements condition over time to determine its useful life based on its deterioration curve.The PMS also develops planning level costs to recommend funding levels for maintaining the systems overall PCI. Since 2007,Federal Way's PCI has dropped nine (9)points from an 86 to a 77(out of 100). Reductions in the annual overlay budget as well as inflation have reduced the length of pavement overlay per year from 13 lane miles to 5.3 lane miles. At the current budget level, it is estimated that Federal Way's PCI will drop to 67 (out of 100) in another ten years. As the PCI continues to drop,the funding level per year required to restore it climbs. The overlay program is currently funded at a level of$1.5 million per year. At that level,based on the current traffic patterns, the funding is not adequate to typically overlay anything other than major arterial routes.No substantial work has been completed within neighborhood streets over the last 10 years, which has led to a continued decline in the pavement condition city wide. Currently, with the overlay program funded at a level of approximately$3 million per year, it is estimated that the PCI will stabilize. This funding level will not however see a drastic increase in the PCI. If the overlay program was funded at a level of approximately$4.5 million per year,it is estimated that the PCI would be restored to 86 in a period of 15 years. Solid waste, recycling and yard waste collection trucks create a disproportionate impact that causes increased maintenance, repair and overlay to all city streets. Unlike typical tractor-trailer combinations, which are restricted to designated haul routes, the solid waste hauler's trucks by necessity regularly drive July 1,2019 LUTC Page 2 upon the city's residential streets in order to serve customers. The estimated impact of one fully loaded vehicle on a residential street is equal to the impact of 1,500 cars on the same street.This loading dialilaLically deci-eases (.lie life of resldcnLi l streets 111 partluular since typlually there is only n11i11iiial heavy truck traffic on these streets. As part of the Solid Waste RFP, staff reviewed practices of other cities with a goal of reducing the impacts to streets in residential neighborhoods.During that review,it was determined that surrounding Cities,including Kent and Des Moines,have enacted similar requirements and rates on their solid waste utility. In conjunction with the start of the new solid waste contract, scheduled for September of 2020, it is proposed to incorporate an increase in the excise tax of 10%.The increase in collected funding is designated as an increase in the overlay program. The current overlay funding sources and levels are proposed to remain unchanged. A minimum of 70% of the funding from the solid waste excise tax will be used for residential streets and any remainder will be used to maintain,repair and preserve other streets within the City. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to an increase of the excise tax upon everyone engaged in the business of collecting solid waste within Federal Way and expanding the definition of "solid waste"; and amending FWRC 3.10.020 and 3.10.040. (Amending Ordinance Nos. 18-847, 10-669, 09-600, 07-562, 06-539, 02-431, 96-276, 96-262, and 95-257) WHEREAS, the City of Federal Way ("City") is a non-charter code city under Title 35A of the Revised Code of Washington ("RCW"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.82.020, the City has broad authority to impose excise taxes for regulation or revenue in regard to all places and kinds of business, production, commerce, entertainment, exhibition, and upon all occupations, trades and professions, and any other lawful activity; and WHEREAS, the City's taxing authority includes the imposition of an excise tax for revenue on the gross incomes from business activities of public and private utilities and businesses within City limits; and WHEREAS, Chapter 3.10 of the Federal Way Revised Code ("FWRC") imposes excise taxes on certain business activities engaged in or carried on in the City, including certain public and private utility services and businesses; and WHEREAS, FWRC 3.10.040 currently imposes an excise tax on the gross incomes of the following: telegraph businesses; competitive telecommunication services; network telecommunication services; cellular telephone services; businesses selling, brokering or furnishing natural gas for domestic, business or industrial consumption; the City for the conduct, Ordinance No. 19- Page I of 11 Rev 1/18 maintenance, and operation of its municipal storm drainage system as a public utility; businesses selling or furnishing electric energy; businesses collecting solid waste; cable communications businesses; and water and sewer providers; and WHEREAS, the City operates its own solid waste utility, and contracts with a service provider to collect, haul, recycle, and dispose of residential and commercial waste throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the City's solid waste contractor, like all solid waste haulers throughout the region, uses large, heavy trucks to collect solid waste, yard waste, and recyclable materials throughout the approximately 545 lane miles of City streets; and WHEREAS, although tractor-trailer combinations are generally heavier on average than the contractor's trucks, such solid waste, yard waste, and recycling trucks, are five or more times heavier than a typical car or SUV and have a disproportionate impact that causes increased street maintenance, repair, and overlay costs. Unlike most tractor-trailer combinations, which are restricted to designated haul routes, the solid waste hauler's trucks by necessity regularly drive upon the City's residential streets in order to serve the utility's residential customers. The City estimates that the impact of one of the hauler's fully loaded vehicles on a residential street is equal to the impact of 1,500 cars; and WHEREAS, the utility's constant truck traffic across residential streets significantly decreases the life of residential streets in particular, because heavy truck traffic on residential streets would otherwise occur on a minimal basis; and Ordinance No. 19- Page 2 of 11 Rev 1/18 WHEREAS, the City's excise tax currently excludes yard waste, material collected primarily for recycling or salvage, and other forms of materials discarded for collection; and WHEREAS, the solid waste hauler's trucks have the similar impacts on streets without regard for what type of material is being carried; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires now to include yard waste and recyclables in the definition of"solid waste," such that these materials will now be subject to the excise tax; and WHEREAS, because of the disproportionate impact to City streets by solid waste collection activities, and in particular, the City's residential streets, the City Council has determined that the solid waste utility should contribute additional funds to maintain and repair the City's streets by raising the solid waste excise tax from the current rate of 7.75 percent to a new rate of 17.75 percent; and WHEREAS, said 10 percent increase in the tax rate shall be collected and used primarily to maintain, repair, and preserve residential streets. A minimum of 70 percent of the newly collected revenue shall be utilized for residential streets and the remainder of the newly collected revenue shall be used to maintain,repair, and preserve other streets within the City; and WHEREAS, the collected funding from the 10 percent increase shall be used to maintain, repair, and preserve City streets and shall not supplant or reduce other funding allocated to the maintenance, repair, and preservation of the street system; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the public to increase the excise tax on public and private utilities and businesses engaged in or carrying on the business of collecting solid waste in the City. Ordinance No. 19- Page 3 of 11 Rev 1/18 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section I,. FWRC 3.10.020 is hereby amended to read as follows: 3.10.020 Definitions. The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise. Terms not defined here are defined according to FWRC 1.05.020. "Cable service"means: (1) A system providing service pursuant to a franchise issued by the city under the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 Public Law No. 98-549, 47 USC Section 521, as it may be amended or superseded; or (2)Any system that competes directly with such franchised system by employing antennas, microwave, wires, wave guides, coaxial cables, or other conductors, equipment or facilities designed, constructed or used for the purpose of: (a) Collecting and amplifying local and distant broadcast television signals and distributing and transmitting them; (b) Transmitting original cablecast programming not received through television broadcast signals; or (c) Transmitting television pictures, film and videotape programs not received through broadcast television signals, whether or not encoded or processed to permit reception by only selected receivers. Ordinance No. 19- Page4ofII Rev 1/18 "Cable service" shall not include television entities that are subject to charges as commercial TV stations under 47 USC Section 158. "Cellular telephone service" means a two-way voice and data telephone/telecommunications system based in whole or substantially in part on wireless radio communications and which is not subject to regulation by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC). This includes cellular mobile service. The definition of cellular mobile service includes other wireless radio communications services such as specialized mobile radio (SMR), personal communications services (PCS) and any other evolving wireless radio communications technology which accomplishes the same purpose as cellular mobile service. "Competitive telecommunication service" means the providing by any person of telecommunications equipment or apparatus, or service related to that equipment or apparatus such as repair or maintenance service, if the equipment or apparatus is of a type which can be provided by persons that are not subject to regulation as telephone companies under RCW Title 80 and for which a separate charge is made. "Designated official"means an agent or employee designated by the mayor. "Gross income" means the value proceeding or accruing from the sale of tangible property or service, and receipts (including all sums earned or charged, whether received or not), by reason of the investment of capital in the business engaged in, including rentals, royalties, fees, or other emoluments, however designated (excluding receipts or proceeds from the use or sale of real property or any interest therein, and proceeds from the sale of notes, bonds, mortgages, or other evidences of indebtedness, or stocks and the like), and without any deduction on account of the Ordinance No. 19- Page 5 of 11 Rev 1/18 cost of the property sold, the cost of materials used, labor costs, interest or discount paid, or any expense whatsoever, and without any deduction on account of losses, including the amount of credit losses actually sustained by the taxpayer whose regular books or accounts are kept upon an accrual basis. "Network telecommunication service" means the providing by any person of access to a local telephone network, local telephone network switching service, toll service, or coin telephone services; or the providing of telephonic, video, data, pagers, or similar communication or transmission for hire, via a local telephone network, toll line or channel, cable, microwave, or similar communication or transmission system. "Network telecommunication service" includes interstate service, including toll service, originating from or received on telecommunications equipment or apparatus in this state if the charge for the service is billed to a person in this state. "Network telecommunication service" does not include the providing of competitive telecommunication service, the providing of cable television service, nor the providing of broadcast services by radio or television stations. "Solid waste" means garbage, trash, rubbish, demolition and construction wastes, recycling, yard waste, orand other materials discarded for collection by everyone engaged in the business of collecting said solid waste. Ordinance No. 19- Page 6 of 11 Rev 1/18 "Telecommunication business" means the business of providing network telecommunication service, as defined in this section. It includes cooperative or farmer line telephone companies or associations operating an exchange. "Telecommunication service" means competitive telecommunication service or network telecommunication service, or both, as defined in this section. "Telecommunications company" includes every corporation, company, association, joint stock association, partnership and person, their lessees, trustees or receivers appointed by any court whatsoever, and every city or town owning, operating or managing any facilities used to provide telecommunications for hire, sale, or resale to the general public within this state. Section 2. FWRC 3.10.040 is hereby amended to read as follows: 3.10.040 Occupations subject to tax—Amount. There are levied upon and shall be collected from everyone, including the city, on account of certain business activities engaged in or carried on in the city, occupation taxes in the amounts to be determined by the application of rates given against gross income as follows: (1) Upon everyone engaged in and carrying on a telegraph business, a tax equal to 7.75 percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the period for which the tax is due; (2) Upon everyone engaged in or carrying on a competitive telecommunication service or network telecommunication service, a tax equal to 7.75 percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the period for which the tax is due. In determining gross income Ordinance No. 19- Page 7 of I 1 Rev 1/18 from such business, including intrastate toll service, the taxpayer shall include 100 percent of the gross income received from such business in the city; (3) Upon everyone engaged in or carrying on the business of cellular telephone service, a tax equal to 7.75 percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the period for which the tax is due; (4) Upon everyone engaged in or carrying on the business of selling, brokering or furnishing natural gas for domestic, business or industrial consumption, a tax equal to 7.75 percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the period for which the tax is due; (5) Upon the city in respect to the conduct, maintenance, and operation of its municipal storm drainage system as a public utility, a tax equal to 7.75 percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the period for which the tax is due; (6)Upon everyone engaged in or carrying on the business of selling or furnishing electric energy, a tax equal to 7.75 percent of the total gross income from such business in the city during the period for which the tax is due; (7) Upon everyone engaged in the business of collecting solid waste, a tax equal to 17.75 percent of the total gross income from the city during the period for which the tax is due, less income derived from collection and sales of materials not defined herein as solid waste. All taxes collected in excess of 7.75 percent shall be used to maintain, repair. and preserve city streets. A minimum of 70 percent of the collected taxes in excess of 7.75 percent shall be used to maintain, repair. and prtsei—vc residential streets-the remaining 30 percent of the collected taxes in excess Ordinance No. 19- Page 8 of'I 1 Rev 1/18 of 7.75 percent, which are not utilized for residential streets. shall be used to maintain. repair. and preserve other streets within the city. (8) Upon everyone engaged in or carrying on the business of cable communications, a fee or tax equal to 7.75 percent of the total gross income from gross subscriber revenues in the city during the period for which the fee or tax is due. For purposes of this chapter, "gross subscriber revenues" means and includes those revenues derived from the supplying of subscription services, that is, installation fees, disconnect and reconnect fees, fees for regular cable benefits including the transmission of broadcast signals and access and origination channels and per- program or per-channel charges; it does not include leased channel revenue, advertising revenue, or any other income derived from the system; (9) Upon everyone engaged in or carrying on the business of selling or furnishing water services for commercial, industrial, or domestic use or purpose, a tax equal to 7.75 percent of the total gross income from such business within the city during the period for which the tax is due; and (10) Upon everyone engaged in or carrying on the business of furnishing sewer services for commercial, industrial, or domestic use or purpose, a tax equal to 7.75 percent of the total gross income from such business within the city during the period for which the tax is due. Section 3. Referendum Procedure. In accordance with RCW 35.21.706, this ordinance is subject to the following referendum procedure. A referendum petition may be filed within seven (7) days of passage of this ordinance with the City Clerk. Within ten (10) days, the City Clerk shall confer with the petitioner concerning the form and style of the petition, issue an identification number for the petition, and secure an accurate, concise, and positive ballot title Ordinance No. 19- Page 9 of 11 Rev 1/18 from the City Attorney. The petitioner shall have thirty (30) days in which to secure the signatures of not less than fifteen (15) percent of the registered voters of the City, as of the last municipal general election, upon petition forms that contain the ballot title and the full text of the measure to be referred. The City Clerk shall verify the sufficiency of the signatures on the petition with King County and, if sufficient valid signatures are properly submitted, shall certify the referendum measure to the next election ballot within the City or at a special election ballot as provided pursuant to RCW 35.17.260. Section 4. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance, or its application to any person or situation, be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. The City Council of the City of Federal Way hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto. Section 6. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Ordinance No. 19- Page 10 of 11 Rev 1/18 Section 7. Effective Date. Subject to the referendum procedure in Section 3, this ordinance shall take effect and be in force on September 1, 2020. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this day of 72019, CITY OF FEDERAL WAY: JIM FERRELL, MAYOR ATTEST: STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: Ordinance No. 19- Page 11 of]] Rev 1/18