The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA-05-022-. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO: FROM: MEETING DATE: TIME: LOCATION: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator 'Mark Peterson, Fire & Emergency Services Administrator Alex Pietsch, CED Administrator Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Monday, March 29, 2010 N/A (Ccmsent Agenda) N/A (Consent Agenda) THE FOLLOWING IS A CONSENT AGENDA LUA05-022, ECF SEPA -Addendum . (Henning) Location: Adjacent to and upland of.the eastern edge of the Panther Creek Wetlands generally located between SR-167 on the west and Lake Ave South/Talbot Road South on the east and extending from SW 43rd Street on the south to 1-405 on the north. Description: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, in order to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program. The Mosquito Abatement Program covers an area adjacaent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetlands. The progam will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthethic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline- powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. cc: D. Law, Mayor J. Covirigton, Chief Administrative Officer' S. Dale Estey, CED Director ~ W. Flora, Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal III> P. Hahn, Transportation Director C. Vincent, CED Planning Director ~ N. Watts, Development Services Director ~ l. Warren, City Attorney III> F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal J. Medzegian, Council DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION OF NON·SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Pursuant to WAC 197-11-600 (4) (c) and WAC 197-11-625 Addendum to the Mosquito Abatement Program as Addended by the City of Renton (LUA-OS-022. ECF) Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) Date of Addendum: March 29, 2010 March 29, 2005 Date of Original Issuance of SEPA Threshold Determination: Proponent: Application File: Project Name: Hebe C. Bernado, City of Renton Surface Water Utility LUA05-022, ECF Mosquito Abatement Program Proposal/ Purpose of Addendum: The City of Renton issued a Determination of Non- Significance for the Mosquito Abatement Program on March 29, 2010. The project had previously been reviewed in a five-year increment, and the 2005 review was for the time period 2005 -2009. ' Since 2001, the Washington State D~partment of Ecology {DOE} has maintained that discharges of pesticides to waters of the State requires coverage under a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES). The City has been covered under the Aquatic Mosquito Control 'General Permit since 2002. The NPDES permit has covered discharge of larvicides but has not covered discharges from adulticide. DOE has updated the NPDES permit in order to allow the use of larvicides and adulticides for controlling mosquitoes in Washington State. The updated permit will regulate discharges of adulticides to water of the state that occur during control of vector mosquitoes due to the West Nile Virus. In the 1970's, the City of Renton initiated the Mosquito Abatement Program in the Talbot Hill area, near the Panther Creek wetlands. Under continued citizen advocacy for mosquito control, the City applied for a SEPA determination for a five-year program {1989-1993}. A DNS was issued by the City and upheld by the Hearing Examiner following an appeal of the determination. Addendum to Environmental \ ) Review Page 2 of4 March 29, 2010 In 1994, the Surface Water Utility applied for a SEPA determination (LUA94-066, ECF) for a land treatment (spraying) program utilizing synthetic pyrethroid products. A DNS was issued, and the spraying program was implemented. Continued recurrence of mosquito populations in the Talbot Hill area near the Panther Creek wetland resulted in citizen requests for continued mosquito control efforts. Another five-year SEPA DNS-M was applied for and issued for the time period 1995 -1999. In 2000, the Surface Water Utility again applied for a five-year SEPA determination to continue the program through to 2004. And, once again in 2005, a DNS-M was applied for and granted to continue the program. Coinciding with the expiration of the 2005 - 2009 SEPA, DOE issues the 2010 Mosquito Control General NPDES Permit, allowing incidental discharges of adulticide into waters of the state in cases of human health emergency due to the West Nile Virus. After the effective date of the NPDES General Permit, the City will seek coverage. The regulations, pesticide application requirements and mitigation measures of the Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES General Permit are similar to the ones specifies in the 2005 -2009 SEPA for the City's Mosquito Abatement Program. In order to ensure the public health and safety, the Surface Water Utility will continue to implement the mitigation measures included in the 2005 -2009 SEPA DNS-M (attached), in addition to the Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES General Permit Requirements as noted below: 1. Provide written information which fully describes the proposed abatement program and schedule to all property owners with the proposed project area. 2. Conduct the project only on City property and on those privately owned parcels for which authorization has been received from the property owner or the owners legal representative. Post a description and schedule of the program at the name and telephone number of a City representative who can provide further information about the program to interested parties. 3. The insecticide spraying must be conducted in upland areas away from water areas and homes by a licensed applicator in accordance with EPA or FIFRA and Department of Agriculture (WAC-16-228) approved application requirements. 4. To prevent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift into the Panther Creek wetlands, application may only be made as conditions permit in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above which treatment may not be conducted. Wind speeds determined by the applicator at the time of treatment must be 10 miles per hour or less and must be blowing in an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek wetlands or the treatment Addendum to Environmental (. I. Review Page 3 of4 March 29, 2010 may not be conducted. Equipment wash-down water is to be disposed of off- site in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface or ground water. 5. Accidental spills are to be reported immediately by the applicator to ~he City of Renton. The City of Renton will notify and report the spill to the proper agencies. Appropriate measures are to the immediately imple~ented by the applicator to first contain and then to clean-up the spill in accordance with Department of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requirements. In order to minimize the risk of spills, only small quantities of the proposed insecticide will be on the project site. 6. The applicator will immediately notify the City of Renton and stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement program. No animal kill is expected because of BIOMIST/KontroI4-4, when used according to the manufacturer's instructions as approved by the EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. The proposal will not change the analysis, impacts, or mitigation measures in the 2005 - 2009SEPA review. In addition, because the regulations and mitigation are equivalent to that specified in the 2005 -2009 SEPA review, no additional mitigation is necessary. This addendum changes eliminates the 5-year review cycle for the City of Renton· Mosquito Abatement Program, and allows the program to continue without triggering additional SEPA review. The City of Renton is hereby issuing a SEPA Addendum pursuant to WA~ 197-11-600. This Addendum is appropriate because it contains only minor new information not included in the original Determination and there are no environmental impacts related to inclusion of the new information. Location: . Panther Creek Wetlands Lead Agency: City of Renton, Department of Community & Economic Development Review Process: Addendum to previously issued Determination of Non- Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). Additional Information: If you would like additional information, please contact Jennifer Henning, Planning Manager, City of Renton Planning Division, Department of Community & Economic Development at (425) 430-7286. There is no comment period for this Addendum, dated March 29, 2010 issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. . . ~ .~ . , .. ," ,'.: .... ,.; .. ,;: ., ',:'.',:.:'.,.:' . ' . . ' . . . . CITY OF RENTON . . . '. : :OET.ERMINATION:OF NON~SIGNIFICANCE~MITJGATED' . .... . .. ",,;":;:,MITIGATI9NMEASURES' .' " . ':,.' "':.: ". ":" " :: ..... :''', . .'~. :.'<--. '. '. '. ··c .,' .. ' .:t~A05-02~,ECF· .. ' . .... '., ': "~' . --.. ',' ...... :-,'" . '.:'. ' ........ . ..... , .. : .. ' ~ity.ofRenton -SurfaceW~ter Utility ...•.. :: .. ' .. ' .":., ;':' .•.. ; ' ..... . ..... '. .:, .. , ""'. "'. . .' ", . . '" .' ..... ,.. ':, ' .. ; 'PRojecTNAME:': ••........ .' :.: •• ··'MosqUito ¥atement Program (2005-?009) ..... . ": . •. : .:'. LOCATION OF:PR9.PQSAL:Adjacentto·and upland of the eastern edge of the'PantherCreek '..' -', " ::-',', '. Wetlimds gener~"y located betweenSR-167 on th~ west and Lake' , . '., . . . ..'. Avenue Sc)uthlf albat .Road ~outh on' the east and extending fro!'J.l.$W .. '..'..' ., . . ':'.' . . ..' 43r~ $treeton·theso~ht61-4050nthe_horth .. ," •... ....: .': ;." .' ;.,' .. . '." "".:. :··OESCRIPT;ON·OF.:PROPOSAL:·.··.· .. :: ..• !t,e:app/iCantls'r~~uestlrig Environmental (S_EPA):.RevI~w:lh: 6rderto' . . ". .continlie a Mosquito.Abatement 'P~~grarnf9r another. rive (5) .~ year peri()d,AJjriI2005through. Septeinber'2009; :. 'The ·moj)quit() abatement prog'ram coversan~rea adjacent to and upland fromttieParittwr,Creek "Yetland. It will '" ...... conslsto"ly of land treatment applicatiQn~ of an Liltra low.. (ULV)·synth,~ticinsecticidespray to. brush and. -other upland v.egetationusrnga.portabl~bl<?wElr., .• :. . '. . .. ' ". ::; ... ' .' .. ' . '.. '. . . .',' '. ". ' ... :i:' .... ::LEADAGENCY: . .'.··.·'· '. . " " .. : .... ; ..... . . .:'~". r. . ;. " . '. ~ '. ' .. '.~'; .... :,': :": '.' .':.' ..... .. ~, ': ':.'. ,~ , .•.• :: MITIGATION MEASURES: : ' . . . . .... , .. ' .. ' .. ': " .. , . . 1:. To :preventexces~ . drift 'irito the Panther Creek· . ' " . , .' .. '.wetlarid~" application;; . . ·.·EPA and DepartrTient of .' .' ." Agriculture approved' . urn .windspeedabov~ Which' ••.. ':. ". . .·t.(e.~tm.ent $h~J.I· not-b~: :'. ~t. the. tim~ ~f .traatin~nt must . '.- , ... b.e 1'0. miles. per: !:lour.' . aWay :from the Panther Cre.e~ : .Wetl~mdso(tne .. . • '.: . '" . ... " : . ' . ' ..... :. .... . 2 •••. Equipmentwas~~dPwn.· ..with· EPA'. and Department pf < ' . •..... ··Agricultl,lrerequlrements waters." :... ." '. '·3. .Aceidentalspilis· ~hali be. . . City of,l=tentcm, the State t)ep~rtm,ent' . .. ' ... ' . of .H.~al~h~· ;the ·b~pa~ment·. . . ' .. ':" of "Ecology: (~pills ··in wa~·er) .. :.: App,rop,riaie :.:::. : ... 1 ... ·measures shall pe.imrn~diatelyim . ···tofirst contain ahdthen to clean upthe'spiU in: .... ". :accorcJal')~ewith '.Departm~nfoL. .applicab.le. agenoyr9quirements~OnIY small>, . -·quahtitiesof.the 'propos9d iri,sect.!cide will. be. on the project site tominimjie'inipact~ jf.a $pill occurs,' . . . '. ~4. ::Tne C'ijy of Renton P~oj~t M!iriag~f/Repre$eritativeshall:'''· .' .., . >..' .. '. ' ... ' .'. . ..' .,:-' .. ' ··a). pro~id~.~~itt~~infOr~atiO~·-,~hi~h f~ily.des~~ib~ the pr~p~sed abatem~nt.pr9.gram and schedule to. all ...... . :. : :. .'.' ..... ' ' pr9perty owners within the .proposed project area; and . '. ,', ' . .' c. '. b) .•. Conducfth&. program (lnIYori.:¢itY property and on tho~~ p~i"ately oWhed. parcei~fO~'NhiCh~uth6rii~tioh •. " ' .•. ' . . ' .. •. ... has.b~ef).teCeiv.EK1 ,rom tht) prop~r:ty o~ner'ortheowrwr's legal r:epre~ent~~iv~;al1d .• ·<.:·.· .' . .; . '.' . c)·p.o~t a' des'oription ·~ndsc~~dul~ 9f t!ie'p~ogramat regul~r in~ervals in.ihevicinity o(ih~ project area .. The···· . '.: .. ·.·informatjon Willlriqlude the name and telephone number (If ~City rep~esent;a~jv.e: ~ho cal') provid~ further. ... •.. ' . .. ,. .: .' '.' ...... : .',: Jnfolinati9!'l'abQut me progranj to oiDtere~ted' PClrties~ '. . '. . ." .. ,.... '. . ..•. . . . . . : .. , :5.' Th~.·lnse~ti~ide:spiaYing· 'n1~~i .b9·'Co~di.rC~~c( in~p:landa~eas. a~ay 'f~~~ wat~r ~~eas and ,home~ by. ~ .• . ...• ' j . > ":"lice~sed applicatorJin 'accordailc.e wl~h'EPA (Federal Insecticide,FLingicld~ 'and' 'RQdenticideAct :or FIFF{A) ... '. ~. '. and Department' of Agriculture.(WAC-·16-428) appr(;>ved appliCation requ,irements,. .• . . .• ;. : . .:..... '. ". '.' .......... '. : .... '. ....... . ... -.... " ...... ' .. " .' .' '·6.. The applicator will Immediateiy notify the City of Renton and' stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement pr9gram. No animal kill is expected because BIOMIST®lKontr91 4-4®, when. . . . used according to.the·mamJfactUre(s jh~trJJptionsas.approvedl:>yEPA, arerepo~ed to:have lowt9xicity to. :' .. ' . B:niJ'ilals. .... .' .. :-:' . ".:.: -.' ..... -, .. :': .. ' .' .:.'. ,,'. " " .. " .... > .. ' ........ , '. ": ';. ' ..•. ' .: . '. I,"" .' •. • ..• : .• ,! . '/' . .. ," ".,' ."'. . . . '.' . ',." : ...... : . :' .. ~:. . : . '. : :' ~. :. '. . . . . . . ", . . ..... ','" . " 1 . ~.' ....... Addendum to Environmental Page 4 of4 March 29, 2010 .) Review ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SIGNATURES: Gregg Zimmer I A inistrator Public Works Department Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department ie ch, Administrator . ment of Community & Economic Development DATE DATE DATE CITY OF RENTON ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Pursuant to WAC 197-11-600 (4) (c) and WAC 197-11-625 Addendum to the Mosquito Abatement Program as Addended by the City of Renton (LUA-OS-022, ECF) Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) Date of Addendum: March 29, 2010 March 29, 2005 Date of Original Issuance of SEPA Threshold Determination: Proponent: Application File: Hebe C. Bernado, City of Renton Surface Water Utility LUA-OS-022, ECF Project Name: Mosquito Abatement Program Proposal! Purpose of Addendum: The City of Renton issued a Determination of Non- Significance for the Mosquito Abatement Program on March 29, 2010. The project had previously been reviewed in a five-year increment, and the 2005 review was for the time period 2005 -2009. Since 2001, the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) has maintained that discharges of pesticides to waters of the State requires coverage under a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES). The City has been covered under the Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit since 2002. The NPDES permit has covered discharge of larvicides but has not covered discharges from adulticide. DOE has updated the NPDES permit in order to allow the use of larvicides andadulticides for controlling mosquitoes in Washington State. The updated permit will regulate discharges of adulticides to water of the state that occur during control of vector mosquitoes due to the West Nile Virus. In the 1970's, the City of Renton initiated the Mosquito Abatement Program in the Talbot Hill area, near the Panther Creek wetlands. Under continued citizen advocacy for mosquito control, the City applied for a SEPA determination for a five-year program {1989-1993}. A DNS was issued by the City and upheld by the Hearing Examiner following an appeal of the determination. In 1994, the Surface Water Utility applied for a SEPA determination (LUA94-066, ECF) for a land treatment (spraying) program utilizing synthetic pyrethroid products. A DNS was issued, and the spraying program was implemented. Continued recurrence of mosquito populations in the Talbot Hill area near the Panther Creek wetland resulted in citizen requests for continued mosquito control efforts. Another five-year SEPA DNS-M was applied for and issued for the time period 1995 -1999. In 2000, the Surface Water Utility again applied for a five-year SEPA determination to continue the program through to 2004. And, once again in 2005, a DNS-M was applied for and granted to continue the program. Coinciding with the expiration of the 2005 - ·2009 SEPA, DOE issues the 2010 Mosquito Control General NPDES Permit, allowing incidental discharges of adulticide into waters of the state in cases of human health emergency due to the West Nile Virus. After the effective date of the NPDES General Permit, the City will seek coverage. The regulations, pesticide application requirements and mitigation measures ofthe Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES General Permit are similar to the ones specifies in the 2005 -2009 SEPA for the City's Mosquito Abatement Program. In order to ensure the public health and safety, the Surface Water Utility will continue to implement the mitigation measures included in the 2005 -2009 SEPA DNS-M (attached), in addition to the Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES General Permit Requirements as noted below: 1. Provide written information which fully describes the proposed abatement program and schedule to all property owners with the proposed project area. 2. Conduct the project only on City property and on those privately owned parcels for which authorization has been received from the property owner or the owner's legal representative. Post a description and schedule of the program at the name and telephone number of a City representative who can provide further information about the program to interested parties. 3. The insecticide spraying must be conducted in upland areas away from water areas and homes by a licensed applicator in accordance with EPA or FIFRA and Department of Agriculture (WAC-16-228) approved application requirements. 4. To prevent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift into the Panther Creek wetlands, application may only be made as conditions permit in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above which treatment may not be conducted. Wind speeds determined by the applicator at the time of treatment must be 10 miles per hour or less and must be blowing in an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek wetlands or the treatment may not be conducted. Equipment wash-down water is to be disposed of off-site in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface or ground water. 5. Accidental spills are to be reported immediately by the applicator to the City of Renton. The City of Renton will notify and report the spill to the proper agencies. Appropriate measures are to the immediately implemented by the applicator to first contain and then to clean-up the spill in accordance with Department of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requirements. In order to minimize the risk of spills, only small quantities of the proposed insecticide will be on the project site. 6. The applicator will immediately notify the City of Renton and stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement program. No animal kill is.expected because of BIOMIST/KontroI4-4, when used according to the manufacturer's instructions as approved by the EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. The proposal will not change the analysis or impacts or mitigation measures in the 2005 . -2009 SEPA review. In addition, because the regulations and mitigation are equivalent to that specified in the 2005 -2009 SEPA review, no additional mitigation is necessary. This addendum changes eliminates the 5-year review cycle for the City of Renton Mosquito Abatement Program, and allows the program to continue without triggering additional SEPA review. The City of Renton is hereby issuing a SEPA Addendum pursuant to WAC 197-11-600. This Addendum is appropriate because it contains only minor new information not included in the original Determination and there are no environmental impacts related to inclusion of the new information. Location: Panther Creek Wetlands Lead Agency: City of Renton, Department of Community & Economic Development Review Process: Addendum to previously issued Determination of Non- Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). Additional Information: If you would like additional information, please contact Jennifer Henning, Planning Manager, City of Renton Planning Division, Department of Community & Economic Development at (425) 430-7286. There is no comment period for this Addendum, dated March 29, 2010 issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SIGNATURES: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Public Works Department Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department Mark Peterson, Chief Fire & Emergency Services Department Alex Pietsch, Administrator Department of Community & Economic Development DATE DATE DATE DATE '" . . '. . •... : .. , '. APPLICANT: ......... . . ' . . ' City of Renton -Surface Water Utility' " .... . '. . ~ " \ :.' ... , . . PROJECT NAME:: •..• . ". ..,'. • MosqUito ~batement Program (2005-?009) .' : :: ... ; ..... . .•• , LOCATION OFPROPQSAL; . ··';.·AdjaCEmttoa~d upl~ndof the ~asternedge of thePantherGreek . ·W.etl~mds gener<:illy located between SR-1.67 01"1 the west and Lake ' . .' .... '., . .'. ", Avellue S6uthlTaibotRoad South on the east and extending frorn,.SW .' . ,.' . 43~ ~treet on the south to 1-405 on the north. :.' •. .": ...... .": . '. -" .. , ... ., ... :'. .' ····.bESCRipT.ION·OFPROPOSAl:·' :r1J~applicant is requesti~g E~vironinentaJ (S)~PA)Review 'in cirderto .contir:llie a Mosquito Abatement prpgramforanother five (5)'~ year period, APril 2005 through September·2009. '. The mosquito abatement program covers an 'i;lrea adjacent to and upland fromthePantt1er·Creek Wetland. It will" .. ·.consistonly of land treatm~nt appli~tiori$ of an.ultra low volume (ULV)syntheticins~icide'sprayto brush and • . other upland vegetation using a ga:soline~PQ:wered,b~ckpack-niounted, portabieblower. ..' .. ' . '. : .', .' .... .- ;", .' ... ,.l~~A~ENCY: ...••...•..•..•.•.••. ·.·/;/.;'·~~i7i~;?~~~~PUb'icworks ... ... .. .... . .. ., .... ......... MITIGATION MEASURES: • '-;"·1~"·:::: .... ' .. ' '\",',,:,,;;"::'.',.":~. '. . ..•.. :.-. ' "."'. '.' ". ; .• . . '. 1: . TO prevent excess drift,,:.:oftt1({ptopQs:~d ,;·;!n.~~j9id.~;:~praysai1d' potential' 'driftirito the Panther Creek :.' " ,Wetlands, appIiQations~~1I only. ~em~d~~:r'P~IJClJt.i(n's.;i~nn.i';inaccd~dancewitIiEPA and Departrnent of ',' ... '.' : " .• ,: Agriculture approved applic~~pn;(;rEI(:@.r~~i\t~:;'~H[jS/;l~~t'riction~ qp;\.t.~e,.:maximl.lm .windspOOdabove. which .'. ", ..... ,', .:' " . "treatm,ent ~hall·notbecQnducted~ "WihQ~P:~~sq~tehnin~d by the"applicator at.the. time of treatment must '" be10.miles 'per-hour or,.less anq mus(be::.biowing':in an ea~erly dir~ction away'from the Panther Creek Wetlands or the treatmentshall.notbecconducted. .\:.: :', . ' . : "," '. ....•... ; ' .• 2.Equipment~a:sh~dPwnv:;~~~(/~~-~!r'Q,~dispoSedo(~ff-Sjt~:)n"a6cida:n~ewith'Ef;)A,andDepartrnent pf.· Agriculture requirements sO'~snPf\<?\cptitl:lminate the~J)rfiic~:or:grq!;'ih.d waters.' ....••.... : ......... ;., ......... . . 3,' Aceidentalspilis' shall berep,6'~~itrim9diat~iy.by·th~·app,lic~t~r~t9:':'the CitY of Renton, the' StateDep~rtment' . . . ....: ...... of Health; the DepartmentofA9d9ulture,;' aflC! the'[)epanm.~nr of EcolOgy (~pillsin water). Appropriate ..! ... measures shalllJeimrnediCitelyimpl~lT)erl.tedb}ith~a:ppliqatof.to,first contain aildthen to clean up the spill in, ... :accordance with' Departmenf oLA9riclilfUi'e~':::'andl()r''()therapplicable agency .requirements~Only small quantities of. the proposed iri.secticide will be. ori the project site to minimizeinipact~ if.a spill occurs,' :. ·4.:Th~ CitY of Renton p~~JeCt MailagerlRepresentative shall:' . . '<. .' ." . . ..... ' .. ". .....'~) :,pro~ide ~itt~ninfOr~atiorl,WhichfU:IlY ·des~ribes. th~. prop~sed abatement.pr0.9rC\m ~d . schedule to :alL .. ; ,'property oWnerin-vithinthe.proposeq project area; and ...... ' . '.' . " .. .' . . . . . . .' . . .. ." ... ". ~ . .. '. ~ . b).' ConduCitheprOgram onlyonCitypropertv.'and on those privately owhed parcels for·1N/1i9haythoriiatio"··· '. '.' . ". .'. hasb~er'!,j'eCeivl:)d from tht) J:>rop~r:ty owner ortheoVfll~r's legal repre~entative;al1d.. '. '. . .; .... 'b) 'po~t a desCription and schedul~ of the program at regular int.ervals inthev,cinity <;>ffu~ project area. The" ; , ·.information Will inqlude the nam!:! an.d telephone number of a City representati'ie)iho can provid~ further. ..:, ". '. :informationabQut ~he progranj tointere~ted· pClJiies: ". .... . . ........,: " '. .... ...........•. '. .•. '. ':5.·. The insecti~idespraYing··mu~t.be'condi.JCted· in upland areas awayf~omwEiterar~as aAdhomes by a '. . ........ . ~··:licensed'applicator.in ·accordailc.9 with EPA (Fecieral Insecticide, Fungicide'and" ROdenticide.Actor FlFRAL .' " "and Department' of Agriculture (VII AC-16-?28) approved applicEition requ,irem~nts.. . '. . .' . '·6 .. Tj,~applicator· "";iHimm~diateiy~otifY th~' CiiyOf Renton andst~p treatment.·if anyanimalsarekilled.ir; '.. .'. assoCiation w.ith the abatementpr99ram~ No animal kill is expected because BIOMIST®lKontrol 4~4®, when. . used according to. the manufactl,lre(s instr'qctions· as approvedpy . EPA, . are reported to :have low t~xicity to . . '. . . animals. '. ' .•. ' .'. ,'. ..... .. ~ .... '.' .. ... '. .. ":,' ", ..•... ' .•... '.': . " '. . .......... ,'. '" .', ........ > ,', ',,' " . . '. .' ...... : .... : ',; . . ~ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO: FROM: MEETING DATE: TIME: LOCATION: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA . Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator Mark Peterson, Fire & Emergency Services Administrator Alex Pietsch, CEO Administrator Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Monday, March 29, 2010 N/A (Consent Agenda) N/A (Consent Agenda) THE FOLLOWING IS A CONSENT AGENDA LUAOS-022, ECF SEPA -Addendum (Henning) Location: Adjacent to and upland of the eastern edge of the Panther Creek Wetlands generally located between SR-167 on the west and Lake Ave South/Talbot Road South on the east and extending from SW 43rd Street on the south to 1-405 on the north: Description: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, in order to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program. The Mosquito Abatement Program covers an area adjacaent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetlands. The progam will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthethic insecticide· spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline- powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. cc: D. law, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer S. Dale Estey, CED Director 1810 W. Flora, Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal ® P. Hahn, Transportation Director C. Vincent, CED Planning Director ® N. Watts, Development Services Director ® l. Warren, City Attorney ® F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner D. Pargas, ASsistant Fire Marshal J. Medzegian, Council PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: M E M 0 RAN DUM March 10, 2010 Jennifer T. Henning, CED Current Planning Manager Hebe C. Bernardo, Surface Water Utility Engine~264) Addendum to the City of Renton Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 SEPA The Surfa'ce Water Utility is requesting an indefinite extension addendum to the City of Renton Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 SEPA, provided there are no additional impacts in the environment or changes in the mitigation measures. PURPOSE OF THE ADDENDUM Since 2001, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) has maintained discharges of pesticides to waters of the state require coverage under a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The City has been covered under the Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit (Permit) since 2002. The NPDES permit has covered discharge of larvicides but has not covered discharges from adulticide. Ecology has updated the NPDES permit in order to allow the use of larvicides and adulticides for controlling mosquitoes in Washington State. The updated permit will regulate discharges of adulticides to waters of the state that occur during control of vector mosquitoes due to the West Nile Virus. PROJECT BACKGROUND In the 1970's, the City of Renton initiated the Mosquito Abatement Program in the Talbot Hill area near the Panther Creek Wetlands. Under continued citizen advocacy for mosquito control, the City applied for a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination for a five-year program (1989-1993). A Determination of Non- Significance was issued by the City of Renton and upheld by the Hearing Examiner following an appeal of the determination. In 1994, the City applied for a SEPA determination for a land treatment (spraying) program during June 1994 -August 1994 utilizing the synthetic pyrethroid products Scourge® and Permanone® 31-66. A Determination of Non-Significance was issued by the City of Renton (File No. LUA-94-066, ECF) for the proposed program, which was then implemented in accordance with the SEPA proposal and determination. Continued recurrence of mosquito populations in the Talbot Hill area near the Panther Creek Wetland resulted in citizen requests for continued mosquito control efforts. In order to provide relief from the nuisance and discomfort caused by the mosquitoes, the Ms, Henning March 10,2010 Page 2 of 4 Surface Water Utility applied for and was granted a five-year SEPA determination of non-significance-mitigated. The program, similar to the 1994 program, was conducted from April 1995 -September 1999. In 2000, the Surface Water Utility again applied for a five-year SEPA determination to continue the program through to 2004. Once more, in 2005, the Surface Water Utility applied for a five-year SEPA determination to continue the program for abatement of mosquitoes in the area through to 2009. A program similar to the 2000, program was conducted from April 2005 -to September 2009. Both products BIOMIST® and KontroI4-4® were used in small concentrations to control mosquito population. Coinciding with the expiration of the 2005-2009 SEPA, the Department of Ecology issued the 2010 Mosquito Control General NPDES Permit (attached) allowing incidental discharges of adulticide into waters of the state in cases of human health emergency due to the West Nile Virus. After the effective day of the Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES General Permit, the City will seek coverage. The regulations, pesticide application requirements and mitigation measures ofthe Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES General Permit are similar to the ones specified in the 2005-2009 SEPA for the City's Mosquito Abatement Program. AQUATIC MOSQUITO CONTROL NPDES GENERAL PERMIT ADULTICIDE DISCHARGE LIMITS A. Compliance with Standards 1. The application of adulticides must not cause or contribute to violations of the Water Quality Standards for Surface Water of the State of Washington (Chapter 173-201A WAC). 2. For the purposes of this permit, the City must use all known, available, and reasonable methods of pollution control, prevention and treatment (AKART) when applying adulticides. The requirements of this permit, compliance with the Washington Pesticide Control Act and the requirements ofthe Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and identified Act (FIFRA) label constitute AKART. The City must use the minimum amount of pesticide to obtain the mosquito control objectives. B. Pesticide Application Requirements The Permittee must: 1. Ensure that a licensed pesticide applicator with the appropriate Washington State Department of Agriculture'(WSDA) license and certification be on site and have direct management responsibilities for the use of pesticides during application. h:\file sys\swp -surface water projects\swp-27 -surface water projects (cip)\27-2000 mosquito abatement program\2010 program\sepa\memo -sepa addendum 201003 04,doc\ECBtp Ms. Henning Marc~lO, 2010 Page 3 of4 2. Ensure that all applicators under supervision of the licensed applicator have current training in the use of the equipment necessary to apply pesticides correctly. 3. Use Ultra Low Volume (ULV) spray apparatus to apply adulticides. 4. Only apply adulticides when wind speeds are above one mile per hour and below 10 miles per hour. 5. Appropriately trained personnel must properly calibrate the ULV equipment for the pesticide formulation used. 6. Follow its Integrated Pest Management Plan. 7. Public notification of pesticide use, per section 56. 8. Use adulticides authorized for use under this permit, per section 55.C. MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED IN THE 2005-2009 SEPA In order to ensure the public health and safety, the 5urface Water Utility will continue to implement the mitigation measures included in the 2005-2009 5EPA in addition to the Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES General Permit Requirements: 1. Provide written information which fully describes the proposed abatement program and schedule to all property owners within the proposed project area. 2. Conduct the program only on City property and on those privately owned parcels for which authorization has been received from the property owner or the owner's legal representative. Post a description and schedule of the program at regular intervals in the vicinity of the project area. The information will include the name and telephone number of a City representative who can provide further information about the program to interested parties. 3. The insecticide spraying must be conducted in upland areas away from water areas and homes by a licensed applicator in accordance with EPA or FIFRA and Department of Agriculture (WAC-16-228) approved application requirements. 4. To pr~vent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift into the Panther Creek Wetlands, application may only be made as conditions permit in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above which treatment may not be conducted. Wind speeds determined by the applicafor at the time of treatment must be 10 miles per hour or less and must be blowing in an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek Wetlands or the treatment may not be conducted. Equipment wash-down water is to be disposed of off- site in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface or ground water. h:\file sys\swp -surface water projects\swp-27 -surface water projects (cip)\27-2000 mosquito abatement program\2010 program\sepa\memo -sepa addendum 2010 03 04.doc\ECBtp Ms. Henning March 10, 2010 Page 4 of 4 5. Accidental spills are to be reported immediately by the applicator to the City of Renton. The City of Renton will notify and report the spill to the proper • agencies. Appropriate measures are to be immediately implemented by the applicator to first contain and then to clean up the spill in accordance with Department of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requirements. In order to minimize the risk of spills, only small quantities of the proposed insecticide will be on the project site. 6. The applicator will immediately notify the City of Renton and stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement program. No animal kill is expected because BIOMIST® /KontroI4-4®, when used according to the manufacturer's instructions as approved by EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. CONCLUSION The proposed addendum will not change the analysis of impacts or mitigation measures in the 2005-2009 SEPA checklists. After the effective day of the Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES General Permit (expected to be effective in July 2010), the City must seek coverage and comply with all regulations and mitigation measures specified in the permit. Such regulations and mitigation measures are equivalent to the ones specified in the 2005-2009 SEPA. No new environmental impacts are expected to result from the addendum. The Surface Water Utility is requesting a SEPA addendum granting an indefinite extension for the Mosquito Abatement Program as the significance of potential impacts will remain the same and the program will be regulated under the Department of Ecology Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES Permit. If you have any questions, please contact Ron Straka or me. Attachments cc: Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility Engineering Supervisor !, h:\file sys\swp -surface water projects\swp-27 -surface water projects (cip)\27-2000 mosquito abatement program\2010 program\sepa\memo -sepa addendum 201003 04.doc\ECBtp . DRAFT February 3, 2010 Issuance Date: 2010 Effective Date: 2010 . Expiration Date: 2015 AQUATIC MOSQUITO CONTROL NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM STATE WASTE DISCHARGE GENERAL PERMIT State of Washington Department of Ecology Olympia, Washington 98504-7600 In compliance with the provisions of the State of Washington Water Pollution Control Law Chapter 90.48 Revised Code of Washington as amended . And The Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended (The Clean Water Act) Title 33 United States Code; Section 1251 et seq. Until the expiration date or until Ecology modifies or revokes this permit, Permittees granted coverage under this permit are authorized to discharge to waters of the state in accordance with . the special and general conditions that follow. Kelly Susewind, Manager Water.Quality Program Department of Ecology TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY OF PERMIT SUBMITTALS .................................................................................... 4 SPECIAL PERMIT CONDITIONS ............................................ ~ ........ .' ......................................... 5 SI. PERMIT COVERAGE ......................................................................................................... 5 A. Activities Covered Under This Permit ............................................................................ 5 B. Activities That May Not Need Coverage Under This Permit ......................................... 5 C. -Geographic Area Covered ................................ : .............................................................. 5 D. Washington State Department of Health Blanket Permit Coverage ............................... 5 S2. APPLICATION FOR COVERAGE ......... ; ........................................................................... 6 S3. DISCHARGE LIMITS .................... ; ...... _ .............................................................................. 7 A. Compliance with Standards ............................................................................................ 7 B. Temporary Exceedance of Water Quality Standards for Larvicides .............................. 7 C. Pesticide Application Requirements ............................................................................... 7 S4. LARVICIDE USE ............................................................................................................ : ... 8 A. Authorized Discharges ..................................................................................... : .............. 8 B. Larvicides Authorized for Use Under This Permit ......................................................... 8 C. Experimental Use of Larvicides ....... : ............................................................................... 9 D. Additional Restrictions on the Use of Larvicides ........................................................... 9 S5. ADUL TIC IDE USE FOR NUISANCE AND VECTOR CONTROL ............................... 10 A. Nuisance Mosquito Control .......................................................................................... -10 B. Vector Mosquito Control .............................................................................................. 10 C. Adulticides authorized for use under this permit .......................................................... 10 D. Experimental Use of Adulticides .......... ; ....................................................................... 11 S6. PUBLIC NOTICIFICATION OF PESTICIDE USE ......................................................... 11 A. Public.Notice .............................................. : .................................................................. 11 B. Posting Requirements ................................... , .............................. ~ ................................ 12 S7. MONITORING REQ~JIREME~S .................................... .-.............................................. 12 S8. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................... 13 A. Annual Report ............................................................................................................... 13 B. Records Retention ......................................................................................................... 13 C. -Reporting Permit Violations ............ _ ............................................................................. 14 S9. APPENDICES .................................................................................................................... 15 GENERAL CONDITIONS .-................................ : ........................................................................ 16 Gl. DISCHARGE VIOLATIONS ............................................................................................ 16 G2. PROPER OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ............................................................. 16 G3. RIGHT OF ENTRY ........................................................................................................... 16 G4. PERMIT COVERAGE REVOKED ...................................................................... .-........... 16 GS. GENERAL PERMIT MODIFICATION AND REVOCATION ....... : .............................. 17 G6. REPORTING A CAUSE FOR MODIFICATION ............................................................ 17 Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 2 G7. TOXIC POLLUTANTS ................ ; .................................................................................... i8 G8. OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF 40 CFR ........................................................................... 18 G9. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS AND STATUTES ............................................. 18 G 1 O. ADDITIONAL MONITORING .............................. .-....................................................... 18 GIl. PAYMENT OF FEES ................................................................................. : .................... 18 G 12. REQUESTS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM COVERAGE UNDER A GENERAL PERMIT .................... : ............................................................................................................... 18 G13. TRANSFER OF PERMIT COVERAGE ............................................................ : ............ 19 G14. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATING PERMIT CONDITIONS ........................................... 19 G15. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS ...................... ~ ............................. ; .............................. 19 G 16. APPEALS ........................................................................................................................ 20 G 17. SEVERABILITY ............................................................................................................. 20 G 18. DUTY TO REAPPLY ..................................................................................... : ............... 21 . APPENDIX A: GLOSSARy ........................................................................................................ 22 APPENDIX B: STATE LISTED SPECIES RESTRICTED USE AREAS ................................. 26 APPENDIX C: TRANSFER OF PERMIT COVERAGE ............................................................ 29 APPENDIX D:PUBLIC NOTICE TEMPLATE FOR NEW COVERAGES ............................. 30 Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 3 SUMMARY OF PERMIT SUBMITTALS Refer to the Special and General Conditions ofthis permit for submittal requirements . Sl.D Transfer coverage from DOH Application for New S2 Coverage (NOl and SEPA S3.B Develop or Update Integrated Pest Management Plan S4.D Request to use Larvicides in Appendix B areas S5.B Request to use Adulticides in Appendix B areas SS.A Annual Reporting SS.C Permit Violation Reporting G5 Permit Actions G6 Reporting Planned Changes G13 Transfer of Permit Coverage GIS Duty to Reapply Once Once Once As Necessary As Necessary Annually As Necessary As Necessary As Necessary As Necessary Once per· permit cycle . Tentative: By July XX, 2010 A least 60 days prior to the start of discharge One year from permit effective date By December 31 of . each treatment year Enter date within ISO. days of permit effective date The text of this permit contains words in italics. Words in italics are the first usage ofa word in this permit and are defined in the Glossary, AppendixA. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 4 SPECIAL PERMIT CONDITIONS S1 .. PERMIT COVERAGE This permit revokes and replaces the Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit issued on March 7, 2007 and covers the use of larvicides and adulticides to control mosquitoes in the State of Washington. A. Activities Covered Under This Permit All entities that control mosquitoes must obtain coverage under this permit when the activity causes a discharge of pesticide or their residues to waters of the state. Entities must obtain .permit coverage when conducting activities under a Federal Experimental Use Permit. B. Activities That May Not Need Coverage Under This Permit Mosquito control entities need not obtain coverage under this permit for pesticide applications made to the following types ofwaterbotlies: .. 1. Man-made detention or retention ponds designed specifically for wastewater or storm water treatment that do not have an outlet to surface waters of the state, or ponds that are not likely to discharge during, or for two weeks after, treatment. 2 .. Any constructed water body five acres or less in surface area with no discharge to other surface waters of the state during, or for two weeks after, treatment. 3. Uplandfarm ponds with no discharge to other surface waters of the state. 4. Standing irrigation water that will not discharge to waters of the state during application or for two weeks, following application. 5~ Any water body less than one aCre in size that is subject to research covered under a state experimental use permit. C. Geographic Area Covered This general permit covers mosquito control activities anywhere in the State of . Washington where the Department of Eco logy has authority. D.Washington State Dep.artment of Health Blanket Permit Cov~rage 1. New coverages under-Washington State Department of Health (DOH) blanket coverage will no longer occur on or after the effective date ofthis permit. 2. Blanket coverage under DOH expires on i~m'E!, 60 days 'after the effective date ~f this permit. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page' 5 3. Mosquito control entities have until llA::ti! (60 days after effective date of the permit) to complete a transfer of permit coverage from DOH. 4. To transfer permit coverage from DOH use the transfer form provided in Appendix C. Both DOH and the New Permittee must fill out and sign the transfer form. 5. Submit the completed transfer fomi to: Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Attn: Aquatic Pesticide Permit Manager PO Box 47600 Olympia, W A 98504-7600 S2. APPLICATION FOR COVERAGE New Applicants that propose to begin activities that will result in a discharge to waters of the state on or after the effective date ofthis general permit must: A. Notify Ecology by submitting a completed application for coverage at least 60 days prior to the planned activity that will result in the discharge to waters of the state. B. Complete a Notice ofIntent (NOI) for the proposed activity electronically. The new applicant must access Ecology's online data management system SecureAccess Washington (http://secureaccess.wa.gov), fill out the NOI online, then print and sign the document. C. Complete and sign a SEP A checklist for the proposed activity. D. Mail the complete application to: Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Attn: Aquatic Pesticide Permit Manager POBox 47600 Olympia, W A 98504-7600 E. Publish public notice only after Ecology has received the complete application for coverage. F. Use the Public Notice Template provided as Appendix D of this permit. Applicants may add information to the template but must include the required information as stated on the template. . G. Publish two times, one week apart, public notice in a local newspaper of general circulation (or regional newspaper if a local newspaper is not availab Ie) that an application for permitcoverage has been made pursuant to WAC 173-226-130(5). Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit:... February 3, 2010 . Page 6 H. Submit an original copy of the portion of the newspaper publication containing the public notice and newspaper date to Ecology for each week the public notice is published, or submit a signed, notarized affidavit of publication indicating what is included in the public notice and the dates the public notice was published. At the end of the required 30-day public comment period, Ecology will consider comments about the applicability of this permit to the proposed discharge activity before deciding to issue permit coverage. If the applicant does not receive notification ofthe coverage decision from Ecology, coverage under this permit will automatically commence on the 61 st day following Ecology's acceptance of a completed application. S3. DISCHARGE LIMITS A. Compliance with Standards I. The appli.cation ofadulticides must not cause or contribute to violations of the Water Quality Standards for Surface Water of the State of Washington (chapter 173-201A WAC). 2. For the purposes of this permit, Permittees must use all known, available, and reasonable methods of pollution control, prevention and treatment (AKAR1) when applying adulticides. The requirements ofthis permit, compliance with the Washington Pesticide Control Act and the requirements of the FIFRA label constitute. AKART. Permittees must use the minimum amount of pesticide to obtain the mosquito control objectives: B. Temporary Exceedance of Water Quality Standards for Larvicides Exceedance of water quality standards for up to "5 years are allowed under this permit provided that the Permittee complies with WAC 173-20 IA-41 O. C. Pesticide Application Requirements The Permittee must complywith the requirements in this permit and Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) label requirements. Permit requirements do not reduce the requirements on the FIFRA label. 1. The Permittee must: a. Ensure that a licensed pesticide applicator with the appropriate Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) license and certification be on site and have direct management responsibilities for the use of pesticides during application. b. Ensure that all applicators under supervisionofthe licensed applicator have current training in the use of the equipment necessary to apply pesticides correctly. c. Use Ultra Low Volume (ULV) spray apparatus to apply adulticides. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 7 . d. Only apply adulticides when wind speeds are above 1 mile per hour and below 10 miles per hour. e. Appropriately trained personnel must properly calibrate the UL V equipment for the pesticide formulation used. f. Follow its Integrated Pest Management Plan. S4. LARVICIDE USE A. Authorized Discharges The Permittee may apply larvicides under this permit only for the control of mosquitoes. B. Larvicides Authorized for Use Under This Permit 1. The Permittee may apply larvicides with the following active ingredients without additional permit restrictions outside of Appendix B areas: a. Bacillus sphaericus (H-5a5b) b. Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (Bti) c. Methoprene d. Monomolecular surface films (MSF) 2. The Permittee must follow the additional permit restrictions below when applying larvicides with the following active ingredients: a. Malathion and Paraffinic white mineral oil Permittees may only use malathion and paraffinic white mineral oil in the case of a human health threat and must obtain Ecology approval prior to use. The Permittee may not use paraffinic white mineral oil in waters of the state unless other pesticides are ineffective at a specific treatment site and the water body is non-fish-bearing. Consult WDFW to determine if the water body is fish bearing. Contact information for WDFW Regional Wildlife Biologists may be accessed at http://wdfw . wa.gov /aboutlcontactl. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 8 b. Temephos The Permittee may not apply temephos in lakes, streams, in the littoral zone of water bodies, or on sites listed in Appendix B of this permit. The permit allows the use oftemephos only: i. In response to the development of pesticide resistance within a specific mosquito population or a human health threat with the approval of Ecology. ii. To minimize the development of resistance the Permittee must rotate the use of temephos with one or more of the other approved larvicides with a different mode of action. c. Experimental Use of Larvicides The Permittee may apply other larvicides not listed in this permit on a limited basis in the context of a research and development effort under the jurisdictions of EPA and WSDA through the issuance of a Federal Experimental Use Permit (40 CFR 172). Permittees must not apply larvicides covered under an experimental use permit to areas identified in AppendixB. D. Additional Restrictions on the Use of Larvicides 1. Appendix B of this permit details specific geographical areas that are important to state and federally listed species. Listed species are those that are state or federally designated sensitive, threatened, candidate, and endangered species in the State of Washington. Ecology inay update Appendix B based on new information . . 2. Prior to use of methoprene, monomolecular surface films, malathion, or paraffinic white mineral oil in Appendix B areas, WDFW and Ecology must approve the use. 3. The Permittee must not apply larvicides unless it meets one or more ofthe following conditions. a. Surveillance of a potential application site indicates that at least one larvae/pupae is present in at least one of three dips. In the event that the Permittee finds larvae, and the area is treated, the Permittee inay continue pre-emptive larvicide treatments without dipping for the remainder of the treatment season. b. The Permittee has developed and obtained Ecology approval of a large site sampling protocol prior to treatment. c. The application. site is in or adjacent to a county in which mosquito, bird, animal, or human mosquito-borne disease cases are confirmed within the current. treatment season. d. The treatment site is a catch basin, storm drain, utility or transportation vault, Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 .. Page 9 e. State or local authorities declare a public health emergency related to mosquito- borne disease. S5. ADUL TICIDE USE FOR NUISANCE AND VECTOR CONTROL A. Nuisance Mosquito Control Adulticides and their residues used for nuisance mosquito control must not be discharged to waters of the state. B. Vector Mosquito Control 1. The Permittee is authorized to discharge incidental amounts of adulticides and their residues to surface waters ofthe state during vector mosquito control. The Permittee must limit incidental deposition to the extent possible by not applying adulticides directly to a surface water of the state. Adulticides may not be used in Appendix B areas unless WDFW and Ecology approve the use. 2. The vector mosquito control period, April 1 to October 31 of the same year, is the .. only time incidental discharge is authorized. The Permittee may request an extension of this period in writing from Ecology if natural population control (die-oft) after October 31 is not expected. 3. Mosquito Control Districts A Permittee that is an organized mosquito control district (chapter 17.28 RCW) may use adulticides to control vector mosquitoes provided it: conducts mosquito surveillance, mosquito disease testing, monitors other disease indicators (such as dead birds, equine disease cases, or human health cases) and follows available DOH vector control guidance (e.g. the West Nile Outbreak Response Plan where the trigger for adulticiding is Alert Level 3). 4. Areas without a Mosquito Control District A Permittee that is not part of an organ.ized mosquito control district (chapter 17.28 RCW) may use adulticides to control vector mosquitoes provided DOH makes the determination that adulticiding for vector mosquito control is necessary to protect public health due to an overriding public health concern. C. Adulticides authorized for use under this permit 1. This permit allows the application of adulticide products that are EPA registered and FIFRA labeled for wide-area mosquito control. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 10 2. The following active ingredients are allowed for use: a. Permethrin b. Resmethrin c. Sumithrin (8-phenothrin) d. Natural Pyrethrins e. Piperonyl Butoxide (PBO) as a synergist f. Malathion g. Naled The Permittee may only use Malathion and Naled in case of documented pyrethroid resistimce development in a specific vector mosquito population. D. Experimental Use of Adulticides The Permittee may apply other adulticides not listed in this permit on a limited basis in the context 9f a research and development effort under the jurisdictions of EPA and WSDA through the issuance ofa Federal Experimental Use Permit (40 CFR 172) . . Permittees must not apply adulticides covered under an experimental use permit to areas identified in Appendix B. S6. PUBLIC NOTICIFICATION OF PESTICIDE USE A. Public Notice 1. The Permittee must publish a public notice at least ten days prior to the first pesticide application oftheseason. This notice must include: a. The pesticide(s) planned for use and the active ingredient(s). b. The approximate date ranges of treatments . . c. The approximate treatment location(s). d. The online location where the public may find pesticide application updates (if available online). e. Where the public can find accJ,lrate information about the pesticides planned for use. f. The water use restrict,ions or precautions. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 11 g. The application area posting procedures. h. The name and telephone number ofthe Permittee and the Ecology Aquatic Pesticides Permit Manager. 2. The Permittee's notification to the public regarding mosquito control activities must continue throughout the treatment season if pesticide applications occur. After the initial newspaper notice, the Permittee may notify the public using a method other than notices in the newspaper, such as website posting or mailings. 3. For expected applications of pesticides that have a water-use restriction (currently only applies to malathion, temephos and paraffinic white mineral oil), the Permittee must publish a public notice in a local newspaper of general circulation (or nearest regional paper if a local newspaper does not exist). B. Posting Requirements 1. The Permittee must post notices at all reasonable points of ingress and egress to the treatment areas when applying larvicides with water use restrictions to water bodies that are used for water supply, fish and shellfish harvesting, or water contact activities. 2. The Permittee must make maps available to the public of the adulticide application areas. Online maps or available hard copies meet this requirement. Permittees must keep the maps for the entire treatinent season. S7. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS A. The Permittee must monitor the amounts of pesticides used and report pesticide. application quantities as required in section S8. B. Dip Sampling 1. When Permittees conduct larva treatments requiring dip samples (sections S4.D), the Permittee must record the: a. Date and place dipping occurred; b. The contractor firm or individual who collected the sample or performed the measurement; c. The larvae count ofthe dip sample. 2 .. The Permittee need not submit this information as part of the annual report but must make the information available to Ecology upon request. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control GeneralPermit -February 3, 2010 Page 12 S8. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS The Permittee must. submit pesticide application information in accordance with the following conditions .. A. Annual Report 1. .By December 31 of each year, the Permittees must submit its annual report electronically through Ecology's online data management-system (SecureAccess Washington at https://secureaccess.wa.gov. A signed and dated copy of the annual report must be mailed to: Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Attn: Aquatic Pesticide Permit Manager POBox 47600 Olympia, W A 98504-7600 2. The annual report inCludes: a. Permit Number, b. Permittee Name, c. Name of the location treated. The location is the area that the Permittee has permit cov~rage for (e.g. Acme Golf Club, City storm drain system, Acme County, Acme mosquito control district), d. Active Ingredient (e.g. Bti, permethrin, etc.), e. Total amount of active ingredient applied this season. The Permittee may total the amount of active ingredient applied at a location, and f. Measurement units (pounds or gallons). B. Records Retention The Permittee must retain records of all monitoring information for a minimum of five (5) years. Such information must include copies of all reports and records required by this permit, and records of all data used to complete the application for this permit. The Permittee must extend this period of retention during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding the discharge of pollutants by the Permittee or when requested by Ecology. The records, reports, other information and documents required by this permit must be made available to Ecology upon request. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 13 C. Reporting Permit Violations The Permittee must take the following actions when it violates or is unable to comply with any permit condition: 1. Immediately take action to stop, contain, and cleanup unauthorized discharges or otherwise stop the noncompliance and correct the problem. 2. The Permittee must report any noncompliance that may endanger health or the environment by telephone to Ecology at the regional spills hotline and the aquatic pesticides permit manager, within 24 hours from the time the Permittee becomes aware ofthe noncompliance. a. Southwest Regional Office: 1-360-407-6300 (Clallam, Clark, Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Jefferson, Mason, Lewis, Pacific, Pierce, Skamania, Thurston, and·Wahkiakum counties) b. Northwest Regional Office: 1-425-649-7000 (Island, King, Kitsap, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, and Whatcom counties) c. Central Regional Office: 1-509-575-2490 (Benton, Chelan, Douglas, Kittitas, Klickitat, Okanogan, and Yakima counties) d. Eastern Regional Office: 1-509-329-3400 (Adams, Asotin, Columbia, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grant, Lincoln, Pend Oreille, Spokane, Stevens, Walla Walla, and Whitman counties) e. Aquatic Pesticide Permit Manager: 1-360-407-6283 3. The Permittee must also provide a written submission within five days of the time that the Permittee becomes aware of any event required to be reported under I or 2 above. The written submission must contain: a. A description of the noncompliance and its cause. b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times. c. The estimated time noncompliance is expected to continue if it has not been corrected. d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent recurrence of the noncompliance. e. Updates that will be included in the Permittee's Integrated Pest Management Plan to address the issue and prevent future noncompliance. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3,2010 Page 14 4.· Ecology may waive the written report required in part 3, above, on a case-by-case basis upon written request if it has received a timely oral report: 5. The Permittee must submit noncompliance reports to: S9.APPENDICES Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Attn: Aquatic Pesticide Permit Manager POBox 47600 Olympia, W A 98504-7600 The attached appendices are incorporated by reference into this permit and are subject to enforcement. 1. APPENDIX A: Glossary 2. APPENDIX B: Endangered, Candidate, Threatened, and Sensitive Species List Areas 3. APPENDIX C: Transfer of Permit Coverage Form 4. APPENDIX D: Permit Coverage Public Notice Template Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 15 GENERAL CONDITIONS Gl. DISCHARGE VIOLATIONS All discharges and activities authorized by this general permit shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this general permit. The discharge of any pollutant more frequently than, or at a concentration in excess of that authorized by this general permit shall constitute a violation of the terms.and conditions ofthis general permit. G2. PROPER OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE The Permittee shall, at all times, properly operate and maintain all facilities or systems of treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions ofthis permit. Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems, which are installed by a Permittee only when the operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit. G3. RIGHT OF ENTRY The Permittee shall allow an authorized representative of Ecology, upon the presentation of credentials and such other documents as may be required by law: A. To enter upon the premises where a discharge is located or where any records shall be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit; B. To have access to and copy at reasonable times any records that shall be kept under the terms of this permit; C .. To inspect at reasonable times any monitoring equipment or method of monitoring required in this permit; . D. To inspect at reasonable times any collection, treatment, pollution management, or discharge facilities; and E. To sample at reasonable times any discharge of pollutants. G4. PERMIT COVERAGE REVOKED Pursuant with chapter 43.21B RCW and chapter 173-226 WAC, the Director may require any discharger authorized by this permit to apply for and obtain coverage under an individual permit or another more specific and appropriate general permit. Cases where revocation of coverage may be required include, but are not limited to, the following: A. Violation of any term or condition of this permit; Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 . Page 16 B. Obtaining coverage under this permit by misrepresentation or failureto disclose fully all relevant facts; C. Failure or refusal of the Permittee to allow entry as required in RCW 90.48.090; D. A determination that the permitted activity endangers human health or the environment, or contributes to water quality standards violations; E. Nonpayment of permit fees or penalties assessed pursuant to RCW 90.48.465 and chapter 173-224 WAC; F. Failure of the Permittee to satisfy the public notice requirements of WAC 173 -226- 130(5), when applicable; or Permittees who have their coverage revoked for cause according to WAC 173-226-240 may request temporary coverage und"~r this permit during the time an individual permit is being developed, provided the request is made within ninety (90) days from the time of revocation and is submitted along with a complete individual permit application form. GS. GENERAL PERMIT MODIFICATION AND REVOCATION This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated in accordance with the provisions of chapter 173-226 WAC. Grounds for modification or revocation and reissuance include, but are not limited to, the following: A. When a change which occurs iIi the technology or practices for control or abatement of pollutants applicable tothe category of dischargers covered under this permit; B. When eftluent limitation guidelines or standards are promulgated pursuant to the FWPCA or chapter 90.48 RCW, for the category of dischargers covered under this permit; C. When a water quality management plan containing requirements applicable to the category of dischargers covered under this permit is approved; or D. When information is obtained which indicates that cumulative effects on the environment from dischargers covered under this permit are unacceptable. G6. REPORTING A CAUSE FOR MODIFICATION A Permittee who· knows or has reason to believe that any activity has occurred or will occur which would constitute cause for mod"ification or revocation under Condition G5 above, or 40 CFR 122.62 shall report such plans, or such information, to Ecology "SO that a decision can be made on whether action to modify coverage or revoke coverage under this permit will be . required. Ecology. may then require submission of a new application for coverage under this, or another general permit, or an application for an individual permit. Submission of a new application does not relieve the Permittee ofthe duty to comply with all the terms and conditions of the existing permit until the new application for coverage has been approved and corresponding.permit has been issued. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 17 G7. TOXIC POLLUTANTS The Permittee shall comply with effluent stand.ards or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic.pollutants within the time provided in the regulations that establish those standards or prohibitions, even ifthis permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement. GS. OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF 40 CFR All other requirements of 40CFR 122.41 and 122.42 are incorporated in this general permit by reference. G9. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS AND STATUTES Nothing in this permit shall be construed as excusing the Permittee from compliance with any applicable Federal, State, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations. GIO. ADDITIONAL MONITORING Ecology may establish specific monitoring requirements in addition to those contained in this permit by administrative orders or permit modification. GIL PAYMENT OF FEES The Permittee shall submit payment of fees associated with this permit as assessed by Ecology. Ecology may revoke this permit coverage or take enforcement, collection, or other actions, if the permit fees established under chapter 173-224 WAC are not paid. G12. REQUESTS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM COVERAGE UNDER A GENERAL . PERMIT Any discharger authorized by this permit may request to be exch,lded from coverage under this general permit by applying for an individual permit. The discharger shall submit to the Director an application as described in WAC 173:-220-040 or WAC 173-216-070, whichever is applicaple, with reasons supporting the request. These reasons must fully document how an individual permit will apply to the applicant in a way that the general permit cannot. Ecology may make specific requests for information to support the request. The Director shall either issue an individual permit or deny the request with a statement explaining the reason for the denial. When an individual penilit is issued to a discharger otherwise subject to this general permit, the applicability of this general permit to that Permittee is automatically terminated on the effective date of the individual permit. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 18 G13. TRANSFER OF PERMIT COVERAGE This permit coverage may be automatically transferred to a new Permittee if: A. The Permittee notifies the Department at least 30 days in advance of the proposed transfer date. B. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing and new Permittees containing a specific date transfer of permit responsibility, coverage, and liability between them. ' C. The Department does not notify the existing Permittee and the proposed new Permittee of its intent to modify or revoke permit coverage. G14. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATING PERMIT CONDITIONS Any.person who is found guilty of willfully violating the terms and conditions of this permit shall be deemed guilty of a crime, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of up to ten thousand dollars and costs of prosecution, or by imprisonment in the discretion of the court. Each day upon which a willful violation occurs may be deemed a separate and additional violation. Any person who violates the terms and conditions of a waste discharge permit shall incur, in addition to any other penalty as provided by law, a civil penalty in the amount of up to ten thousand dollars for every such violation. Each and every such violation shall be a separate and distinct offense, and in case of a continuing violation, every day's continuance shall be and be deemed to be a separate and distinct violation. G15. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS All applications, reports, or information submitted to Ecology shall be signed and certified. A. In'the case of a municipal, State or other public facility, all permit applications shall be signed by a principal executive officer or ranking elected official. In t,he case of a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship, all permit applications shall be signed by either a principal executive officer of at least the level of vice president of a corporation, 'a general partner of a partnership, or the proprietor of a sole proprietorship. ' B. All reports required by this permit and other information requested by Ecology shall be signed by a person described above or by a duly authorized representative of that person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if: 1. The authprization is made in writing by a person described above and submitted to Ecology. 2. The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated facility, such as the position ofplantmanagei, superintendent, position of equivalent responsibility, or an' individual or position ' having overall responsibility for environmental matters. (A duly authorized Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 19 representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position.) C. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph B.2 above is no longer accurate because a different individual or position has responsibility for the overall operation of the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements of paragraph B.2 above must be submitted to Ecology prior to or together with any reports, informatiQn, or applications to be signed by an authorized representative. . D. Certification. Any person signing a document under this section shall make the following certification: I certifY under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. G16. APPEALS The terms and conditions of the mosquito control general permit are subject to appeal. There are two different appeal categories. A. The permit terms and conditions as they apply to the appropriate class of dischargers are subject to appeal within thirty (30) days of issuance of the mosquito control general permit in accordance with chapter 43.21 (B) RCW and chapter 173-226 WAC; and B. The applicability ofthe permit terms and conditions to an individual discharger are subject to appeal in accordance with chapter 43.21(B) RCW within thirty (30)· days of the effective date of coverage of that discharger. An appeal of the coverage ofthe mosquito control general permit to an individual discharger is limited to the applicability or non-applicability of the mosquito control general permit to that same discharger. Appeal of this permit coverage of an individual discharger will not . affect any other individual dischargers. If the terms and conditions of the mosquito control general permit are found to be inapplicable to any discharger(s), the matter shall be remanded to Ecology for consideration of issuance of an individual permit or permits. G17. SEVERABILITY The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision of this general permit or application of any provision ofthis general permit to any circumstance is held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this general permit, shall not be affected thereby. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 20 G1S. DUTY TO REAPPLY The Permittee shall reapply for coverage under this permit, at least, one hundred and eighty (180) days prior to the specified expiration date of this permit. An expired permit and coverage under the permit continues in force and effect until Ecology issues a new permit (coverage) or until Ecology cancels it. Only those facilities which have reapplied for coverage under this permit are covered under the continued permit. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 21 APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY All definitions listed below are for use in the context of this permit only. Active Ingredient: The ingredient in a pesticide product formulation that provides the insecticidal effects. There may be more than one in a product formulation and may be combined with other additives to increase the insecticidal effects. Adjacent: Something or somewhere near but not necessarily right next to something else. Adulticide: A pesticide product designed to target adult mosquitoes and applied using ultra-low volume techniques. - Alert Level: Levels assigned by Washington Department of Health to the relative threat ofa disease outbreak based on infection rates, time of year, mosquito surveillance and other factors in the West Nile Virus Outbreak Response Plan. All Known and Reasonable Technologies (AKART): All known, available, and reasonable methods of pollution control and prevention as described in 90.48.010, 90.48.520, 90.52.040, and 90.54.020 RCW and 173-201A-020, 173-204-120, 173-204-400, 173-216-020, 173-216-050, 173-216-110, 173-220-130 WAC. Best Management Practices (BMP): Practices, procedures, techniques, equipment, physical controls or any actions that minimize discharges to waters of the state in addition to permit requirements; may be synonymous with AKART. The Ecology pUblication "Best Management Practices for Mosquito Control" are BMPs. Blanket Coverage: Permit coverage extended to mosquito control entities by Washington Department of Health through their NPDES permit coverage to control mosquitoes in Washington State. Complete Application: A completed and signed Notice of Intent and SEPA checklist for the proposed activity. - Constructed water body: A human-made water body in an area that is not part of a previously existing watercourse, such as ponds, streams, wetlarids, etc. DiplDipping: The act of scooping up a small amount of water and examining it for the presence/absence of mosquito larvae. Discharge: The addition of any pollutant to a water of the state. Entity(s): Who is in control of pesticide applications, would apply for permit coverage and includes, but is not limited to Mosquito Control Districts, Commercial Pest Applicators, Cities, Counties, Public Utility Districts, Public Health Districts, Municipalities, State and Local agencies, and any other commercial, private, public, or government entity providing mosquito control. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 22 Experimental Use Permit: Federal and state permits that allow the use of unregistered pesticides in the context of research and development for registration of the pesticide under FIFRA Section 3, or in the context of research and development for registration of a new use of a currently registered pesticide under FIFRA Section 3. See 40 CFR 172, 15.58.405 RCW, and WAC 16~228-1460. FIFRA: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Incidental: The minimum amount of adulticide deposition possible to surface waters ofthe state during properly conducted pesticide applications (in accordance with this permit and the FIFRA label) for controlling vector mosquitoes. Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP): An ecologically based strategy for pest control that incorporates monitoring, biological, physical, and chemical controls in order to manage . pests with the least possible hazard to people, then environment and property.·· IPMP considers all available control actions, including no action. Pesticide use is only one control action. Larvicide: A pesticide product designed to target mosquitoes in larva and pupa life stages and applied directly to water. Mosquito Control District (MCD): A district organized under the authority of chapter 17.28 RCW for the control of mosquitoes in Washington State. Mosquito Control Entity: See 'Entity.' Nat~ral Pyrethrins:Chemicals isolated from the chrysanthemum flower that have insecticidal properties. New Applicant: An entity or mosquito control entity that proposes to begin discharge of pesticides to control mosquitoes and that does not yet have permit coverage but is beginning the permitting process by submitting a complete application to Ecology. New Permittee:-Permittees who begin mosquito control activities that discharge pesticides after the effective date of this permit. This does not include Permittees who were covered under Washington State Department of Health's blanket NPDES permit coverage unless they fail to transfer permit coverage (section S1.D) within 60 days of the effective date ofthis permit. Nuisance Mosquito Control: The use ofIPM, larvicides, and adulticides to control mosquitoes that are an annoyance to humans and animals but are not known in Washington State to carry disease that may be transmitted to humans. . Open Accessible Areas: Areas that are easily accessible by the public (e.g. wetlands, ponds, lakes, etc.) . Permittee: Entities that apply for and gain coverage under this permit and have control of or cause the discharge permitted under coverage of this permit. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 23 Pesticide: A chemical formulation that has insecticidal properties and is used to control mosquitoes. Pesticide Applicator(s): An individual with the appropriate Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) license(s) to apply pesticides (larvicides and/or adulticides) . Pesticide Resistance: The build-up of a t<?lerance to a pesticide. by the target insect through survival of individuals who are not impacted by enough pesticide to cause mortality or through genetic variance have natural tolerance. When an insect is pesticide resistant to a specific formula, that formula will have reduced efficacy or sometimes no effect at all. Planned Treatments: A schedule of~eatment dates developecl by the mosquito control entity at the beginning ofthe treatment season. Pollutant(s): Means any substance discharged that would alter the chemical, physical, thermal, biological, or radiological integrity of the waters of the state of would be likely to create a nuisance or renders such waters harmful, detrimental or injurious to the public health, safety, or welfare, or to any legitimate beneficial use, or to any animal life, either terrestrial or aquatic. Pollutants include, but are not limited to, the following: dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, filter backwash, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge, munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt, pH, temperature, TSS, turbidity, color, BODS, TDS, toxicity, odor, and industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste. Product Formulation(s): The active, inert, and other ingredients specific to a brand name pesticide (e.g. Altosid, Permanone, or Trumpet EC). . Pyrethroid: A synthetic chemical insecticide formulated to mimic the action of the natural pyrethrins. Qualified toxicologist: A person with a PhD in toxicology or in a health or ecological science with an emphasis in toxicology, or a person with a Master's degree in toxicology or a related science with an emphasis in toxicology, who is working in the field oftoxicology. Range: A .specific series of dates that anticipates the months of planned treatment. This is a planned range-it can be exceeded if public health concerns arise. Representative sampling: In a large treatment area, the sites selected within that area that provide statistical significance (as determined by a statistician). Residue: Any excess pesticide applied dur:ing an application and any excess pesticide, all chemicals, and their degredants left behind after a pesticide has completed its purpose. Secure Access Washington (SAW): The web based application where persons may apply for permit coverage and Permittee's may update information and submit annual reports. SAW is located at https://secureaccess.wa.gov. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 24 Synergist: An additive or other active ingredient that increases the effectiveness of the main active ingredient in a pestiCide formulation. Surveillance: The act of setting traps to monitor for the presence of mosquitoes and. to trap wild mosquitoes for mosquito:'borne disease testing. Ultra Low Volume (UL V): A type of pesticide application that uses very small amounts of pesticide per acre (approximately 1 fluid ounce per acre depending on FIFRA label . requirements); This type of application creates an invisible fog with particles approximately 30 microns in size that drifts to impact adult mosquitoes. Upland farm pond: Private farm ponds created from upland sites that did not incorporate . natural water bodies (WAC 173-201A-260(3)(f). Vector Mosquito'Control: The use ofIPM, larvicides and adulticides to control mosquitoes that are known carriers, in Washington State, of disease that may be transmitted to humans. The current list of endemic diseases in Washington includes West Nile virus, Western Equine Encephalitis, and St. Louis Encephalitis. Washington Pesticide Control Act: Chapter 15.58 Revised Code Washington (RCW) . Water Supply, Conveyance, Drainage, or Other Restricted Access Systems: Restricted access areas that are accessible only through manholes or other means. Not readily accessible to the public (e.g. water, electrical or transportation vaults, storm drains, catch basins, etc.) Waters of The State: All surface and ground waters in Washington State as defined by chapter 90.48.020 RCW 173-201A-020 WAC and 173-226-030 WAC including any future amendments of state law. Also includes drainages to waters of the state. Water-use Restriction: This refers to any product labeled for restricted water use immediately after treatment (currently applies only to malathion, temephos, and paraffinic white mineral oil). '. In the absence of other definitions set forth herein, the definition as set forth in 40 CFR Part 403.3 or in chapter 90.48 RCW shall be used for circumstances concerning discharges. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 P~ge 25 APPENDIX B: STATE LISTED SPECIES RESTRICTED USE AREAS Criteria Used for the Restrictions The criteria WDFW used for denoting species as vulnerable were: 1) State species of concern (e.g. listed as state endangered, threatened, sensitive, or candidate). 2) Current range and distribution ofthe species was highly localized. 3) The species inhabited freshwater wetlands during most of the mosquito control treatment period. Six species initially met those criteria: northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens), Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa), western toad (Bufo boreas), western pond turtle (Clem~ys marmorata), American white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos), and one butterfly, the Yuma skipper (Ochlodes yuma). WDFW identified areas occupied by the two extant populations of northern leopard frog; two extant western Washington populations of Oregon spotted frog; western toad breeding ponds (for western Washington only); the three remainingwestern pond turtle populations; the single American white pelican breeding colony; and the one known Washington Yuma skipper population. Based on the review of published literature, expert advice, and the vulnerability of these rare and endangered animals and their freshwater invertebrate food resources wDFW requested that if mosquito control is deemed necessary in the areas .WDFW described in April 2003, that it be restricted to the use of Bacillus products. Aerial Applications An exception to the WDFW request regarding the use of certain larvicides was made for the single American white pelican breeding colony. The colony resides on islands and along the shores of the Columbia River, south of the confluence of the Snake River, in Walla and Benton counties. While bio-chemicals such as methoprene were not of concern for the pelican breeding colony, the method of aerial application was believed to be unacceptably disturbing for their successful breeding. It was agreed that aerial applications would not be made on the pelican breeding areas~ whereas less obtrusive methods of mosquito control were acceptable near these sites. Discussions among several WDFW biologists found that aerial applications of larvicides disturbed work being done in a few wildlife refuge areas around the state. It was therefore agreed that operators making aerial applications over wildlife refuges should notify the appropriate regional WDFW office of their scheduled aerial applications at least 24 hours prior to spraying. The notification can be made by phone or fax. Area of Impact Only a few populations of northern leopard frog, Oregon spotted frog, western toad, western pond turtle, and Yuma skipper remain in Washington. The total area occupied by these species in Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 26 rivers, lakes, ponds, and wetlands is tiny, comprising of portions of 117 sections «0.18% of Washington State). The areas identified for northern leopard frog (36 Sections) and western pond turtle (13 Sections) are owned or managed by WDFW. A prudent, risk-adverse approach is warranted with vulnerable threatened and endangered species. The following areas are restricted to the use of Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (Bti) and Bacillussphaericus (H-5a5b): 1. Grant County, north of Moses Lake, within the Crab Creek watershed: T21N R27E Sections 1, 12, and 13; T21N R28E Sections 7, 17, 18, 19,28,29,30,31,32, and 33. 2. Grant County, south arid west of Moses Lake and south of Interstate-90, the northern portion ofthe Potholes: T19N R27E Sections 33,34,35, and 36; T19N R28E Sections 31 and 32,29, 30; T18N R27E Sections 1,2,3,4,8,9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16, 17; T18N R28E Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 17, and 18. 3, Grant County, area within and near the Sun Lakes -Dry Falls State Park wetlands: T24N R27E and 28E. 4. Kitsap County: lakes, ponds, and wetlands located in T22N Rl W Sections 1,2, 10, 11, and 12. 5. Klickitat County, west of the Klickitat River, all waters in T3N R12E Sections 28,29,32, and 33. 6. Mason County, on the Kitsap Peninsula: lakes, ponds, and wetlands located in T23NR2W Sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,22, and 23. 7. Pierce and Kitsap counties, Carney Lake, located in T22N Rl W. 8. Pierce, Thurston, and Lewis counties, within the Nisqually River watershed: Alder Lake (or Alder Lake Reservoir), located in townships: T15N R4E and 5E. 9. Pierce County, south of Tacoma, Chambers Creek and associated waters in T20NR2E Sections 26 and 27. 10. Skamania County, east of Carson, all waters in T3N R8E Sections 23, 24, 25, 26, and 36; T3NR9E Sections 30 and 31. . 11. Thurston County, west ofYelm: lakes, ponds, and wetlands located in T17N RIE Sections 8, 9; 16, and 21. 12. Thurston County, south of Olympia and east of Interstate-5, within the Black River . watershed, the Beaver Creek drainage, located in T16N R2W Sections 9, 10, 11, and 12; T16N Rl W Section 7. 13. Thurston County, south of Olympia and west ofInterstate-5, within the Black River , . watershed: Black River proper from south of Black Lake to the Chehalis River confluence, •• ~'r. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 27 and the following tributaries, Stony Creek, Dempsey Creek, Salmon Creek, and Blooms Ditch. Legal description as follows for these sensitive areas: TI7N R3W Sections 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 23, 24, 25, 35, and 36; TI7N R2W Sections 7, 18, 19, and 30; T16N R3W Sections 2, 11, 14, 19,20,21,22,23,30, and3I; TI6N R4W Sections 25, 26, 27,31,32,33, 34, 35, and 36. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 28 APPENDIX C: TRANSFER OF PERMIT COVERAGE Mosquito Control General Permit DO NOT ALTER THIS FORM DEPARTMENT OF Both the current Permittee and the new Permittee(s) must sign this form. Provide the date ECOLOGY that the new applicator assumes responsibility for the facility. Attach additional sheets if State of Washington necessary. I. Original Permittee Permittee's Name: Permit Number: Agency/Company: Mailing Address: City: Olympia State: W A Zip: Phone Number: Fax Number: Email address: Signature: II. New Permittee Name: Title: Agency/Company: Mailing Address: City: State: Zip: Phone Number: Fax Number: Email address: New Permittee will assume responsibility and liability for coverage on: Month / Day / Year Signature: III. New On-Site Contact Person (if different than above) Contact Name: Title: Company Name: Mailing Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Cell Phone: Email Address( optional): Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 29 , .. APPENDIX D: PUBLIC NOTICE TEMPLATE FOR NEW COVERAGES The public notice must be published at least once each week for two consecutive weeks, in a single newspaper of general circulation in the county or counties where the mosquito control activities will take place. The bold language is required by WAC 173-226-130 and must be included as part of the public notice in its entirety. Information may be added to this template, but no information may be removed or changed. PUBLIC NOTICE TEMPLATE (Insert Applicant Name) is seeking coverage under the NPDES Waste Discharge General Permit for mosquito control. (Insert Applicant Name) is located at (Insert applicant business address and phone number). The proposed coverage applies to the geographical area describe below (Describe the . boundaries of mosquito control operations): Areas within the described boundaries may be treated to control mosquitoes. The chemicals planned for use are (list all active ingredients anticipated for use): Any person desiring to present their views to the Department of Ecology regarding this application may do so in writing within 30 days of the last date of publication of this notice. Comments must be submitted to the Department of Ecology. Any person interested in the Department's action on the application may notify the Department of their interest within 30 days of the lasfdate of publication of this notice. Submit comments to: Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Attn: Aquatic Pesticide Permit Manager P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7696 Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit -February 3, 2010 Page 30 r. ;.: -'';''~.".~, FACT SHEET FOR THE AQUATIC MOSQUITO CONTROL NPDES GENERAL PERMIT DRAFT February 3, 2010 DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This fact sheet is a companion document to the 2010 Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit (permit) and explains the nature of the proposed discharges, the Washington State Department of Ecology's (Ecology) decisions on limiting the pollutants in the receiving water, and the regulatory and technical basis for these decisions. The challenge of the Permit issued in 2010 is the attempt to strike a balance between the health . of the environment and human health and meet federal and state regulatory requirements. Both are extremely important issues and very complex. To meet this challenge, Ecology worked with an advisory group of individuals who work as professionals in mosquito control, human health, . and state regulatory fields while drafting the 2010 Permit. Ecology has maintained that in order to discharge pesticides to waters of the state, coverage under a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required. The Sixth Circuit Court ruled in National Cotton Council et al. v. EPA that the discharge of pesticides and their residues to waters of the state requires NPDES permit coverage. Ecology has covered discharges of larvicides under the Permit since 2002. Updating the PERMIT was a necessary step that Ecology had to take in order to address discharges of adulticides to waters of the state that occur during control of vector mosquitoes. The 2010 Permit continues to cover larvicide use (the larvicides remain the same from 2007), but now also covers the use of adulticides to control vector mosquitoes when human health is at risk. The draft 2010 Permit includes the following adulticides: natural pyrethrins, several pyrethroids (permethrin, resmethrin, sumithrin (d-phenothrin), a synergist (Piperonyl Butoxide), and two organophosphate pesticides for emergency use only (Malathion and Naled). The natural pyrethrins and pyrethroids have a low toxicity to humans and other mammals, but pose a high risk to aquatic organisms and non-target insects. If the Permittees follow the Permit, application BMPs and FIFRAlabel requirements, they will minimize the risk to aquatic organisms while still controlling vector mosquitoes when they present a human health risk. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3,2010 Page 2 Table of Contents I::N'"TRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 6 AQUATIC PESTICIDE LEGAL HISTORy ••........................................................................... 8 The Federal Clean Water Act ...................................................................................................... 8 The Federal Insecticide, Rodenticide and Fungicide Act ........................................................... 8 Headwaters, Inc. v. Talent Irrigation District .............................................................................. 8 League of Wildlife Defenders et al. v. Forsgren ......................................................................... 8 Fairhurst v. Hagener .................................................................................................................... 9 EPA Final Rule: Application of Pesticides to Waters of the U.S. in Accordance with FIFRA .. 9 Northwest Aquatic Eco-Systems v. Ecology ............................................................................ 10 National Cotton Council et al. v. EPA ...................................................................................... 10 MOSQUITO BACKGROuND .......•.......................................................................................... 11 M ·t L·c I (5,54) . . 11 OSqUl 0 llecyc e ............................................................................................................ . Disease Transmission by Mosquitoes ....................................................................................... 12 . Public Health Impacts From Mosquitoes .................................................................................. 12 MOSQUITO CONTROL .................................................................. ~ ........................................ 13 Control/Management Options ................................................................................................... 13 Integrated Pest Management ..................................................................................................... 14 . Mosquito Control Programs ...................................................................................................... 15 PESTICIDE INFORMATION .................................................................................................. 15 Larvicides .................................................................................................................................. 15 Bacillus thUringiensis israelensis (Bti} .................................................................................. 16 Bacillus sphaericus ................................................................................................................ 16 Methoprene ............................................................................................................................ 17 Monomolecular Surface Films .............................................................................................. 17 Larvicidal Oils ...................................................................................................................... 18 Malathion .............................................................................................................................. 18 .Temephos .............................................................................................................................. 19 Adulticides ...... , ......................................................................................................................... 20 Pyrethrins and Pyrethroids .................................................................................................... 20 Piperonyl Butoxide ................................................................................................. : ............. 21 Naled ......................... : .................. · ......................................................................................... 21 Pesticide Registration Licensing Information ........................................................................... 22 Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 3 REGULATORY INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 22 Regulatory Pollution Reduction Requirements ......................................................................... 22 Technology Based Water Quality Protection Requirements ......................................... ; ........... 23 Surface Water Quality-Based Effluent Limits .......................................................................... 24 Numerical Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Life and Recreation ..................................... 24 Numerical Criteria for the Protection of Human Health ........................................................... 24 Narrative Criteria ....................................................................................................................... 25 Antidegradation ......................................................................................................................... 25 Evaluation of Surface Water Quality':'based Effluent Limits for Numeric Criteria .................. 26 Sediment Quality ........... ; ........................................................................................................... 27 SEPA Compliance ...................................................................................................................... 27 Endangered Species .................................................................................................................... 27 PROPSED PERMIT CONDITIONS •....................................................................................... 28 SI. Permit Coverage .................................................................................................................. 28 S2. Permit Application Requirements ....................................................................................... 30 S3. Discharge Limits ................................................................................................................. 31 S4. Larvicide Use ...................................................................................................................... 32 S5. Adulticide Use fot Nuisance and Vector Control ............................................................... 32 S6. Public Notification of Pesticide Use ................................................................................... 36 S7. Monitoring Requirements ................................................................................................... 36 S8. Reporting Requirements ., ................................................................................................... 37 PERMIT ISSUANCE PROCEDURES .................................................................•.•••••••.•........• 38 Permit Modifications ................................................................................................................. 38 Recommendation for Permit Issuance ....................................................................................... 38 GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................................. 39 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................•.....................•............................. 44 Books ........................................................ : ................................................................................ 44 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Publications ............................................ 44 Court Cases ............................................................................................................................... 44 Department of Ecology Publications ......................................................................................... 45 Department of Health Publications ........................................................................................... 45 Federal Publications .................................................................................................................. 46 Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 4 Journal Articles ......................................................................................................................... 47 Miscellaneous Resources .......................................................................................................... 48 . Online Resources (Databases) ................................................................................................... 48 Revised Code Washington (RCW) ........................................................................................... 49 Technical Resources (Labels and MSDS) ................................................................................. 49 Washington Administrative Code (WAC) ................................................................................ 49 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT INFORMATION ••............................................ 51 APPENDIX B: LIST OF TECHNiCAL CALCULATIONS .................................................. 53 APPENDIX C: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ....................................................................... 54 Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 5 INTRODUCTION Since 2001, and based on the Headwaters v. Talent Irrigation District ruling, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) has maintained discharges of pesticides to waters of the state require coverage under a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit (Permit) has covered discharge of larvicides since 2002 but has not covered discharges from adulticide use. Until the issuance of the 2010 Permit, Ecology had prepared a draft administrative order allowing discharge of adulticides to waters of the state in case of a human health emergency due to West Nile Virus. Ecology has updated the Permit in order to address discharges of adulticides to waters of the state that occur during control of vector mosquitoes in response to the court decision described below. Clean Water Act (CWA) and Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) label requirements appear to be in conflict after the January 2009 National Cotton Council et ai., v. EPA ruling from the Sixth Circuit Court. FIFRA labels allow for incidental discharges to waters of the state during the proper application of adulticides. CW A requirements do not allow Ecology to exempt "incidental" discharges from permitting requirements. If a discharge of pollutants to the waters of the state occurs, regardless of the amount, a permit must cover it. The CW A does not prohibit discharges, just discharges without a permit. In the case of adulticides, incidental discharges do occur, therefore applicators must obtain a NPDES permit. This is where the CW A and FIFRA requirements must work together. The CW A, through the permitting process, informs applicators (Permittees) how much pesticide they may discharge during pesticide applications and not cause unacceptable harm to the environment. The challenge of the Permit issued in 2010 is Ecology'S attempt to strike a balance between the health of the environment and human health. Both are extremely important issues and very complex. To meet this challenge, Ecology worked with an advisory group of individuals (some of whom are Permittees) who work in the fields of mosquito control, human health, and state environmental and pesticide regulation while drafting the 2010 permit. This fact sheet, a companion document to the draft Permit, provides the legal and technical basis for permit issuance (WAC 173-226-11 0). Eco~ogy proposes to issue an updated Permit to allow the use of larvicides and adulticides for controlling mosquitoes in Washington State. This fact sheet explains the nature of the proposed discharges, Ecology's decisions on limiting the pollutants in the receiving water, and the regulatory and technical basis for these decisions. WAC 173-226-130 specifies public notice of the draft permit, public hearings, comment periods, and public notice of issuance before Ecology can issue the general permit. This fact sheet, the application for coverage, and draft permit are available for review (see Appendix A -Public Involvement-for more detail on public notice procedures). Permittee's and other interested parties are part of a permit advisory group that reviewed the preliminary permit draft. Ecology has corrected errors and omissions identified during review before going to public notice. After the public comment period closes, Ecology will summarize and respond to substantive comments. These comments may cause Ecology to revise some of the permit language and requirements. The summary and response to comments will become part of the file for this permit and parties submitting comments will receive a copy of Ecology'S response. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 6 Ecology will not revise the original fact sheet after it publishes the public notice. Appendix C (Response to Comments) will summarize comments and any resultant changes to the Permit. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet-February 3,2010 Page 7 AQUATIC PESTICIDE LEGAL HISTORY The Federal Clean Water Act (CW A)(23) The Federal Clean Water Act (FCWA, 1972), and later modifications (1977, 1981, and. 1987), established water quality goals for the navigable (surface) waters of the United States. One of the mechanisms for achieving the goals of the Clean Water Act is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System of permits (NPDES permits), which is administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA has delegated responsibility to administer the NPDES permit program to the· State of Washington based on Chapter 90.48 RCW that defines Ecology'S authority and obligations in administering the discharge permit program. The Federal Insecticide, Rodenticide and Fungicide Act (FIFRA)(25) The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act of 1979 (FIFRA), as administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Washington State Departinent of Agriculture, requires that all persons who apply pesticides classified as restricted use be certified according to the provisions of the act or that they work under the supervision of a certified applicator. Commercial and public applicators must demonstrate a practical knowledge of the principles and practices of pest control and safe use of pesticides, which they accomplish by means of a "core" examination. In addition, applicators using or supervising the use of any restricted use pesticides purposefully applied to standing or running water (excluding applicators engaged in public health related activities) must pass an additional exam to demonstrate competency as described in the code of federal regulations (40 CFR 171.4). Any person wishing to apply pesticides to waters of the state must obtain an aquatic pesticide applicator license from the Washington State Department of Agriculture, or operate under the supervision of a licensed applicator. Headwaters, Inc. v. Talent Irrigation District (March 2001)(13) Headwaters, Inc. and Oregon Natural Resources Council filed a Clean Water Act citizen suit against the Talent Irrigation District (TID) for applying aquatic herbicide into a system of irrigation canals. These canals discharged water into a creek causing a fish kill. The Ninth Circuit Court in Headwaters, Inc. v. Talent Irrigation District found that the applicator should have obtained coverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit prior to application of aquatic pesticides to an irrigation canal in Oregon. The decision addressed residues and other products of aquatic pesticides. Reversing a district court's opinion, the Ninth Circuit held that application of the pesticide in compliance with the labeling requirements ofthe Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) did not exempt TID from having to obtain a NPDES permit, and that the irrigation ditches were "waters of the United States" under the Clean Water Act. League of Wildlife Defenders et at. v. Forsgren (November 2002)(15) In the 1970's, the Douglas Fir Tussock Moth defoliated approximately 700,000 acres of Douglas Fir in Idaho, Oregon and Washington. In response to this outbreak, the United State Forest Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 8 Service (USFS) developed a system to predict tussock moth outbreaks and control them via aerial spraying of insecticides. The League of Wildlife Defenders filed suit against the USFS for failing to obtain a NPDES permit under the CW A for the application of insecticides directly above surface waters. The USFS argued that any discharge of insecticides was nonpoint pollution, and that the discharges fell under federal exemptions (40 CFR 122.3) for silviculture activities. The Ninth Circuit Court reversed a district court's opinion upon appeal. It held that aerial spraying (from an aircraft fitted with tanks) directly to, and over, surface water is a point source of pollution, and requires an NPDES permit. Fairhurst v. Hagener (September 2005)(14) The Montana Department ofFish, Wildlife, and Parks (Department) began a ten-year program to re-introduce threatened native westslope cutthroat trout into Cherry Creek. This project used antimycin to remove non-native rainbow and Yellowstone cutthroat trout from Cherry Creek over several years, after which it would reintroduce native trout. The Department was sued under the citizen suit provision of the CW A for failing to obtain a NPDES permit before applying antimycin to surface waters. During summary judgment, the district court decided in favor of the Department. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit court affirmed the district court's opinion. The.Ninth Circuit opined that: "A chemical pesticide applied intentionally, in accordance with a FIFRA label, and with no residue or unintended effect is not "waste, and thus not a "pollutant" for the purposes of the Clean Water Act. Because the Department's application of antimycin to Cherry Creek was intentional, FIFRA compliant, and without residue or unintended effect, the discharged chemical was not a "pollutant" and the Department was not required to obtain a NPDES permit." EPA Final Rule: A~plication of Pesticides to Waters of the U.S. in Accordance with FIFRA (November 2006i2 . Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final rule in 2006 entitled "Application of Pesticides to Waters of the United States in Accordance with FIFRA." This rule replaced a draft interpretive statement issued by EPA in 2003 concerning the use of pesticides in or around waters of the United States. The rule states that any pesticide meant for use in or near water that is applied in accordance with the EPA-issued FIFRA label, is not a pollutant under the Clean Water Act. Therefore such applications are not subject to NPDES permitting. After EPA issued the rule, Ecology met with stakeholders to seek input on how Ecology should regulate use of aquatic pesticides. Ecology also provided the public with a three-week comment period. Stakeholders affiliated with each of the seven affected permits (mosquito, noxious weeds, aquatic plants, irrigation, oyster growers, fish management, and invasive moth) sent comments to Ecology. The majority of comments requested that Ecology continue to issue joint NPDES/state permits to regulate aquatic pesticide applications. A pesticide applied to the water according to state law is a form of pollution. To apply a pesticide in the water, state law requires that the applicator obtain a short-term modification of Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet-February 3,2010 Page 9 the water quality standards from Ecology. Currently, the only legal vehicle for implementing that modification is a permit. State law only defines two types of permits for surface water discharges: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (federal) and State Waste Discharge (state). Until 2001, Ecology issued modifications using an administrative order. This process was challenged in court and is currently not a viable regulatory option. Ecology decided that Washington would continue to use NPDES permits to control the use of aquatic pesticides in and around Washington state waters until the federal courts made a decision on the appeal of the EPA rule. These permits help the state protect human health and the environment by: • Ensuring pesticides with the lowest risk are used. • Reducing amounts of pesticides applied. • Tracking pesticide use. • Requirin"g public notifications and po stings when waters are treated. • Monitoring levels of pesticides in the water after treatment. Ecology believes that these permits provide the best protection of water quality, human health, and the environment at this time. Ecology has taken steps to minimize the regulatory and administrative burden on Permittees while ensuring that the permits comply with federal and state la~s and court decisions. Northwest Aquatic Eco-Systems v. Ecology (June 2007i17) In February 2006, the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB) issued a final order in case #05-101, Northwest Aquatic Ecosystems vs. Ecology, WTC. This case focused on a number of issues, one of which was whether an NPDES permit is required for the use of federally registered pesticides since the Ninth Circuit Court ruled in Fairhurst vs. Hagener. The Board ruled that: "Northwest Aquatic also renewed its summary judgment argument that "the Board should rule NPDES permit coverage is not needed for the application of aquatic pesticides, when they are applied in accordance with the Federal InsectiCide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Northwest Aquatic bases this argument on the recent federal court decision in Fairhurst v. Hagener, 422 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2005). The Board ruled on summary judgment that the Fairhurst decision does not provide a blanket exemption for the application of aquatic pesticides. Identified conditions must be met before a pesticide can be considered outside the category of a pollutant under the Clean Water Act. The pesticide must: (1) Be applied for a beneficial purpose, (2) Be applied in compliance with FIFRA, (3) Produce no pesticide residue, and (4) Produce no unintended effects (Fairhurst, 422 F.3d at 1150). Northwest Aquatic failed to provide any evidence specifically addressing how the use of diquat and endothall on the proposed sites would meet the four factors identified in Fairhurst. In the absence of such evidence, Fairhurst provides no basis for the Board to conclude a NPDES permit is not required for the proposed pesticide applications." National Cotton Council et al. v. EPA (January 2009)(16) In November 2006, EPA issued a final rule under the CWA that determined that pesticides applied in accordance with the FIFRA label are exempt from NPDES permitting requirements. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 10 Petitioners filed for review of EPA's final rule in 11 ofthe 12 federal circuit courts that are able to hear regulatory arguments. The federal courts combined the petitions into one case within the Sixth Circuit Court. In its opinion, the Sixth Circuit made several findings. First, it agreed with the Ninth Circuit (Fairhurst v. Hagener) that if a chemical pesticide is intentionally applied to water for a beneficial purpose, and leaves no waste or residue after performing its intended purpose; the discharge would not require a NPDES permit. Second, the Court found excess pesticides and residues that make their way into waters during and after any pesticide application constitute wastes under the CW A and must have NPDES permit coverage before the discharge occurs. Finally, the Sixth Circuit determined that because EPA's final rule exempted discharges that the plain reading of the CWA includes as requiring a NPDES permit, the rule cannot stand. After a later motion, the Sixth Circuit granted EPA a stay on the effective date of this ruling for 24 months to allow EPA to develop NPDES permits for pesticide discharges. EPA is developing several general ·permits for the discharge of pesticides including aquatic plant, larval and aerial mosquito control and intends to issue the permits in 2011. MOSQUITO BACKGROUND Mosquitoes are classified as class Insecta, order Diptera, Family Culicidae, and represent more than 200 species in the United States(54). Mosquitoes from six genera are found in Washington and include Aedes, Anopheles, Coquilletidia, Culex, Culiseta, and Ochlerotatup2). Mosquito Lifecycle(5,54) The highly variable mosquito life cycle ranges from one to three weeks, depending on factors such as water temperature and food availability. Mosquitoes will breed wherever water can support their larvae. A very small amount of water (such as that trapped in a tire, tin can or hoof print) is necessary to allow successful maturation of mosquitoes, and warmer water causes quicker development of larvae. Mosquitoes either lay eggs in masses or rafts on the water surface, or deposit their eggs on moist substrates that will later be flooded with water. Mosquito eggs take 24 to 48 hours to develop and hatch, though eggs of species that deposit on moist substrates may sometimes last for months before they hatch due to flooding of the moist area. Mosquitoes undergo a complete metamorphosis, which involves four stages of development, egg, larva, pupa and adult. The female mosquito lays the eggs directly on water in "rafts" or on moist substrates that may later be flooded with water. The egg hatches into larva, or "wrigglers." During the larval stages, a mosquito feeds and goes through four growth stages called instars. When the larva reaches the fourth instar, it stops feeding and pupates. During the pupa stage, the larva rests and undergoes the many internal changes necessary to mature into an adult mosquito. This period lasts a few hours to a few days, after which an adult mosquito emerges from the pupa. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 11 " Adult mosquitoes are most active from dusk until dawn when they search for a meal and a mate. Nectar and other plants juices make up most of the adult mosquitoes diet. Only female mosquitoes need a blood meal in order to produce eggs. After the female mosquito takes a blood meal, it deposits eggs to continue the cycle. Disease Transmission by Mosquitoes(5,6,7,8,9,IO,1l,12,21,54) Female mosquitoes of nearly all species require a blood meal (protein) from vertebrate animals to develop eggs. Several species of mosquito will use humans as blood meal hosts and some of these species can transmit various diseases to humans. In order for a mosquito to transmit disease to humans, it must first take a blood meal from a host that is carrying a transmittable disease. Most of these hosts are birds and small mammals, making them important to the amplification of diseases in the environment. After taking a blood meal from an infected bird or animal, the mosquito may bite a human, transferring the disease to the human in its saliva. West Nile virus is a good example of this mode of transmission. Diseases transmitted by mosquitoes and other insects are known as arthropod-borne viruses (arboviral diseases). Globally, the arboviral diseases transmitted by mosquitoes to humans include West Nile virus, encephalitides, dengue, yellow fever, malaria, and filariasis Other pathogens transmitted by mosquitoes include Dirofilaria immitis, a parasitic roundworm and the causative agent of dog heartworm. Some of these diseases have been endemic or epidemic diseases in the United States in the past, but today, only the insect-borne (arboviral) encephalitides and West Nile virus fever occur annually. Dengue occurs periodically in this country, mostly in the far South. Public Health Impacts From Mosquitoes(6,7,8,9,IO,12,21) Currently, only West Nile virus (WNV), St. Louis Encephalitis (SLE), and Western Equine Encephalitis (WEE) are l\nown to occur (endemic) in Washington based on DOH commeI\ts on the preliminary draft PERMIT. These diseases can cause serious, sometimes fatal neurological ailments in people (the WEE virus also causes disease in horses). WEE infections tend to be more serious in infants while SLE can be more serious for older people. WNV can infect anyone, though immunocompromised people or those over 50 have the highest probability of developing a severe form of the disease. These viruses normally infect birds and small mammals in the environment. During such infections, the level of the virus may increase in these infected animals (amplification) facilitating transmission to humans by mosquitoes. WNV, a much publicized arboviral disease in Washington and the U.S, was originally found in the northeastern United States in 1999. Approximately 20 percent of the humans infected with WNV will develop West Nile fever, which has symptoms similar to influenza, and lasts for a few days to several weeks in rare cases. Of those infected with WNV (not WNV fever), approximately 0.7% will develop a severe form of WNV neuroinvasive disease. The neuroinvasive form ofWNV can be meningitis, encephalitis, meningoencephalitis, or poliomyelitis(JO) and can leave lasting neurological effects after recovery. Most humans infected with WNV will never develop symptoms.(IO) Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 12 ," Close to 30,000 human cases of West Nile virus have been reported in the U.S. as of the end of 2009. Of those cases, 12,088 were reported as meningitis/encephalitis, 16,765 were West Nile fever, and 771 were unspecified reports. 1161 mortalities due to the neuroinvasive form of WNV have been reported separatelyY2) For comparison, Centers f9r Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) lists seasonal influenza cases at 5-10% of the US ~opulation with 200,000 hospitalized and 36,000 mortalities from flu related issues annually. I) In Washington, the first reports ofWNV occurred in 2006. Since then, 42 human cases ofWNV have been reported, three of which were meningitis/encephalitis. One death occurred due to the neuroinvasive form ofWNV in 2009.(12) Even if mosquitoes do not transmit disease when they bite mosquito bites can cause other effects such as irritation, redness, itching, pain, secondary infections and allergic reactions. Though Ecology found no statistics for allergies to mosquito bites, an article in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology by the Joint Council of Allergy Asthma and Immunology lists life threatening stinging insect (bees, wasps, and ants) allergies as affecting 0.4-0.8% of children and 3% of adults.(42,43) MOSQUITO CONTROL Control/Management Options Public agencies, such as those that are components of or collaborating with local health departments or are independent districts organized specifically for mosquito control, can best manage mosquitoes using Integrated Pest Management on an area wide basis (chapter 17.58 RCW). Washington has approximately 16 mosquito control districts (MCDs). Some MCDs are small and have responsibility for mosquito abatement in a few hundred square miles, while the activities of others may encompass one entire county or more. Public agencies accomplish mosquito control in two ways, by using larvicides and adulticides. Larvicides target the pre-adult stages of the mosquito life cycle (egg, larva, and pupa). Adulticides target the flying adult mosquitoes. Because mosquito larva are concentrated and relatively immobile in waterbodies, they are easier to target and control than adults. MCDs focus most (80-90%) of their control' efforts on mosquito larva. In areas without an MCD, mosquito control is usually limited to larviciding. MCDs may also apply adulticides, but ordinarily only when adult populations become so large that they cause extreme annoyance to many people or when the threat of disease transmission to humans or economically important (horses or cattle) livestock is high. Many larvicidal materials currently in use are biological in origin and are highly specific for mosquitoes, with little or no effect on other aquatic organisms. Adulticides commonly used are from the pyrethroid class of chemicals originally derived from the chrysanthemum flower. Other popular adulticides used are organophosphates. Applicators distribute larvicides by hand or aerially. Hand applications use broadcast spreaders Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 13 ·' such as backpack granulators and liquid sprayers used to spread control materials either mounted on A TV s or carried by the applicator. Aerial applications normally use a coilVentional spray boom to improve coverage with the small volume of spray solution applied per acre. The spray produces a large droplet size at low pressure and low volume. The pilot monitors the flow rate to minimize pressure and controls drift by applying when air temperatures and wind speeds are low. Pilots apply larvicides directly to water in order to target the areas where mosquito larvae are rearIng. Applicators use Ultra Low Volume (UL V) application equipment to apply adulticides from air (aerial UL V) and ground (ground UL V) based vehicles. This equipment produces an invisible aerosol of 30-micron (average) size droplets designed to drift so that it affects the most mosquitoes possible. Applications of adulticides typically occur during the periods when mosquitoes are most active and females are searching for a blood meal host, dusk and dawn. Control of irrigation water in agricultural areas to avoid excess runoff is an important mosquito control method. Anecdotal evidence suggests that water rights (use it or lose it) also plays a significant role in this issue on the Eastern side of Washington. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) The current interests in ecology and environmental impact of mosquito control measures, and . increasing issues from pesticide resistance emphasize the need for Integrate Pest Management (IPM). IPM is an ecologically based strategy that relies heavily on natural mortality factors and seeks control tactics that are compatible with or disrupt the natural factors as little as possible. Ideally, an IPM program considers all available control actions, including no action, and evaluates the interaction among various control practices, cultural practices, weather, and habitat structure. This approach uses a combination of resource management techniques to control mosquito populations with decisions based on surveillance. IPM includes the use of pesticides but only after mosquito population monitoring indicates a need. A good integrated pest management (IPM) program --featuring monitoring/surveillance for high mosquito populations and disease, resident education and action to maximize natural controls and minimize mosquito breeding sites, larviciding when necessary and adulticiding as a last resort --can control mosquitoes effectively while reducing pesticide exposure to humans and the environment. Surveillance methods include studying habitats by air, aerial photographs, and topographic maps, and evaluating larval populations. Mosquito control officials also monitor mosquito traps, and complaint reports from the public. Seasonal records are kept in concurrence with weather data to predict mosquito larval occurrence and adult flights. Many mosquito control programs and local health jurisdictions monitor mosquito-borne diseases by having wild birds, mosquito pools, and/or sentinel chickens tested for disease. Source reduction involves eliminating the habitat or modifying the aquatic habitat to prevent mosquitoes from breeding. This measure includes sanitation measures where artificial containers, including discarded automobile tires, which can become mosquito habitats, are collected and properly disposed. Habitat modification may also involve management of impounded water or open marshes to reduce production and survival of the floodwater Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3,2010 Page 14 mosquitoes. If habitat modification is not feasible, biological control using fish may be possible though approval of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) is necessary to introduce a non-native species, or a native species outside its natural range. It is the policy of Department of Ecology Water Quality Program (WQP 1-06 and 1-06A) that larval control should be central to IPM. The underlying philosophy of larval mosquito control is that control is more effective on concentrated, immobile and accessible larvae populations. This emphasis focuses on habitat management and controlling the immature stages before the mosquitoes emerge as adults. This policy reduces the need for widespread pesticide application in urban areas. Pesticides are applied in areas prone to mosquito larvae rather than being dispersed more widely, which ideally should have less environmental impact than adulticiding. IPM larval control often includes applying biological or chemical larvicides with selective action and moderate residual activity to the aquatic habitats. To have the maximum impact on the mosquito population, larvicides are applied during those periods when immature stages are concentrated in the breeding sites before the adult mosquitoes emerge and disperse. Fish and game specialists and natural resources biologists should be involved in planning IPM control measures whenever delicate ecosystems could be impacted by mosquito control practices. Mosquito Control Programs Mosquito control activities can be important to the public health, and responsibility for carrying out these programs rests with state and local governments, health departments, and vector or mosquito control districts. Modem mosquito control programs in the U.S. are multifaceted and include surveillance, source reduction, and a variety of larval and adult mosquito control methods following IPM strategies. In Washington, mosquito control is provided by mosquito control districts, cities, counties, municipalities (Public Utility Districts) and commercial applicators depending on the region and resources available. PESTICIDE INFORMATION Larvicides . The PERMIT authorizes the discharge of several larvicidal active ingredients when an entity is working to control mosquitoes. The active ingredients included for use the permit are Bacillus sphaericus (H-5a5b), Bacillus Thuringiensis israelensis, Methoprene, Monomolecular surface films, Malathion, and Temephos. Active Ingredient Use Bacillus sphaericus (H-5a5b) Control for first through third instar larvae. Higher rates are needed for late third and fourth instar larvae. Can have extended residual control even in highly organic aquatic environments. Draft Aquatic Mosquito ControtGeneral Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 15 Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. israelensis (Bti) Control for first, second, and third instar larvae. Higher rates are needed for late third and fourth instar larvae. Methoprene First, second, third, and fourth instar larvae control. Monomolecular surface film POE Larvae and pupae control. Okay for potable isooctadecanol water. Petroleum and mineral based oil Larvae and pupae control. State restricted use. Consult with WDFW before using. Temephos State restricted use. Malathion State restricted use. Emergency use only. Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (Bti) Bacillus thuringiensis, subspecies israelensis (Bti) is a naturally occurring soil bacterium that can effectively kill mosquitoes during the larval stage of development. Bti is an endospore- forming bacterium that is ingested by the actively feeding larvae. When the bacteria Bti encysts, it produces a protein crystal toxic to mosquito larvae. Once the bacteria have been ingested, the toxin disrupts the lining ofthe larvae's intestine causing it to stop eating and die. Bti is the primary material used for mosquito control because of its low toxicity to non-target species. Bti is highly pathogenic against the first through third larval instars of mosquitoes (family Culicidae), blackflies (Family Simuliidae) and has some virulence against certain other Dipteran Families, especially midges (Family Chironomidae). Bti has been extensively studied for effects on non-target organisms and environmental consequences of use with no reported adverse effects. It is not toxic to bees. According to several studies, when applied at field application rates, Bti has no reported effect on fish and amphibians. Studies have also found no effect on warm-blooded mammals. Labels indicate that direct contact with the products may cause mild eye or skin irritation. Bti products are available in liquid,pellet, granular, and briquette formulations. The type ofBti formulation influences the activity of the product. Generally, Bti does not persist long after ~pplication, with toxicity persisting from 24 hours to over one month when the longer lasting formulations are used. Larvaltoxicity can depend on the species, its feeding activity and other possible factors such as UV light, water quality, pH, temperature, agitation, and sedimentation. Commercially available Bti strains are sold under several names, including Aquabac, Bactimos, Bonide Mosquito Beater "Plunk~", Healthy Ponds, Sentry, Summit Bti Briquettes, Teknar and Vectobac. A number ofBti products are available for residential use in water bodies, such as lined ornamental ponds, and are sold under various trade names such as Bayer Advanced Garden Mosquito Preventer, Beckett Skeeter Stopper, Mosquito Depth Charges, Mosquito Dunks, Mosquito Bits Quick-Kill, and Spectracide Mosquito Stop. Bacillus sphaericus (Bs) Bacillus sphaeriCus is a naturally occurring (where does it occur), spore-forming bacterium, which produces a protein endotoxin at the time of sporulation. The toxin is on~y active against the larval stage and must be ingested and digested before it activates. B. sphaericus has the Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 16 , . ..: unique property of being able to.control mosquito larvae in highly organic aquatic environments such as manure waste lagoons ahdstomiwater catch basins. B. 'sphaericus can offer up to six weeks of control in many habitats because the protoxiris and spores can remain suspended in the water column for extended periods and due to the recycling of bacteria in dead larvae. Duration of control will depend upon habitat factors such as water depth, flushing, water chemistry and frequency of oviposition to maintain the recycling process. Vectolex, the trade name for B. sphaericus, is available in corncob granule, water dispersible granule, and water dispersible pouch formulations. B. sphaericus was first registered for the control of Culex mosquitoes but its uses have been expanded to include control of several Aedes, Anopheles, Ochlerotatus, Psorophora and Coquilettidia species. B. sphaericus is not acutely toxic to freshwater and saltwater invertebrates, honeybees, mayfly larvae, does not appear to be harmful to fish and other marine life, and.is not toxjc to birds on a sub chronic basis. In tests, B. sphaericus was not pathogenic, infective or toxic in laboratory animals by the oral, dermal, pulmonary and intravenous routes of exposure. In humans, mild skin·and eye irritation can occur with direct contact. Methoprene Methoprene is a compound that mimics the action of an insect growth-regulating hormone and . prevents the normal maturation of insect larvae. Unable to metamorphose, the mosquitoes die in the pupal stage. Methoprene is classified as a biochemical pesticide because it controls mosquito . larvae byinterferirig with the insect's life cycle rather than through direct toxicity. Methoprene is available in numerous formulations and sold under the product names: Zoecon Altosid, Biosid, and Strike. Formulations labeled for residential use are sold under the names Pre-Strike and Vet- Kern. Studies indiCate that methoprene is of low toxicity and poses little risk to people when used according to label instructions. Methoprene was not shown to have any significant toxicological effects in the standard battery of toxicity studies used to assess human health effects. T~e pesticide has very low acute oral and inhalation toxicity potential and is not an eye· or skin irritant. Methoprene is also of low acute dermal (skin) toxicity and is not a human skin' serisitizer. In laboratory tests, the toxicity of methoprene to birds and fish is low, and it is nontoxic to bees. Field studies involving methoprene have shown that it has no lasting adverse effects on populations of invertebrates or other non-target aquatic organisms when used according to label instructions for mosquito control. Methoprene mosquito control products present minimal acute a~dchronic risk to freshwater fish, freshwater invertebrates, and estuarine species. Methoprene is not persistent in the environment. It degrades rapidly in water, being susceptible to transformation by sunlight and microorganisms. Monomolecular Surface Films Monomolecular surface film (MMF) is a nori-petroleum surface oil that acts as a physicochemical agent by altering the mosquito's habitat. It belongs to the alcoholethoxylate group of surfactants (products meant to increase product efficacy), which are used in detergent Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 17 products. MMFs disrupt the cohesive properties of water, which allow mosquitoes to use the water's surface as an interface for breeding. In effect, by making the surface "wetter," MMFs drown mosquitoes. MMFs kill larvae and pupae by making it impossible for them to keep their breathing tubes above the water's surface. Mosquitoes that require little or no surface contact for breathing, such as Coquillettidia species, require properly timed applications at surface contacting stages- the pupae to emerging adult-for maximum impact. Since MMFs kill mosquitoes with a physical mechanism (rather than a toxic mechanism), it is not effective in habitats with persistent winds of greater than ten miles per hour, or in areas with very choppy water. Some species, such as the midge, and some arthropods that require attachment to the water surface have been shown to be affected. MSF is non-toxic to most non-target wildlife. According to EPA, MMFs poses minimal risks to the environment when used according to FIFRA label directions. The green tree frog progressed normally from tadpole to adult through' several generations after being exposed to a constant film presence for six months. MMFs are not a skin irritant, is only a mild eye irritant on prolonged or repeated contact, and is considered to be non-toxic by animal tests. As with all pesticides, direct contact should be avoided. The film persistence is dependent on temperature, water flow, amount of bacteria in the water, and the duration and strength of the wind following application. MMFs typically persist on the water's surface for 5-22 days. Larvicidal Oils Oils are used to form a coating on top of water to drown larvae, pupae, and emerging adult mosquitoes. Oils are petroleum or mineral based and are typically used as a product of last resort for the control of mosquito pupae, since this stage does not feed but does require oxygen. Oils can persist for 12 to 15 hours and then evaporate within a few days. Larvicide oils, if misapplied, can be toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms. Studies have shown that aquatic invertebrates, amphibians, waterfowl, furbearers and fish may be deleteriously affected. The mosquito control permit requires consultation and agreement ofWDFW prior to using these products. Malathion Malathion is a broad spectrum, non-systemic organophosphate insecticide. It is used in agriculture, residential, pharmaceutical, and public health programs across the country to control a large number of pests. Relatively resistant to UL degradation (photolysis), malathion is susceptible to hydrolysis in alkaline conditions. In neutral to alkaline conditions, the half-life of malathion is 1 to 2 weeks and in acidic conditions, the half-life is 107 days. Information included in the EPA revised RED for Malathion indicate that malaoxon (malathion primary metabolite) can remain stable for at least 72 hours, which is long enough to reach domestic drinking water supplies in some areas. Half-life in soil is 1 to 25 days, depending on microbial activity, with higher activity resulting in a shorter half-life. Malathion does not adsorb to soils very well so it somewhat mobile in the soil, and has the potential to leach to groundwater. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 18 'J'" Like other organophosphates, it works by disrupting the central nervous system through ~holinesterase inhibition. Its primary metabolite is malaoxon, is also a cholinesterase inhibitor. Carboxyesterase activity in the body work to reduce the effects of malathion and malaoxon accumulation. Carboxyesterase are more active in mammals than insects, which can explain the higher toxicity in insects. Malathion has a low toxicity to mammals, though at high doses a decrease in cholinesterase activity and some respiratory lesions during inhalation tests are seen. Symptoms of malathion poisoning include headache, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, muscle weakness, lethargy and anxiety. Life threatening exposure can cause respiratory distress, diarrhea, tremors, confusion, seizures and coma. Malathion is highly toxic beneficial insects and aquatic organisms (both vertebrates and invertebrates) during acute and chronic testing. Acute toxicity is not expected in reptiles as they have detoxification efficiency similar to mammals. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) completed a biological opinion on the effects of EPA's malathion re-registration decision to endangered Pacific Salmon in 2008. NMFS concluded that EPA re-registration of malathion would jeopardize the existence of 27 endangered populations and adversely modify critical habitat for 25 endangered pacific salmonids. EPA is required to develop endangered species bulletins at the county level, or include FIFRA label requirements for California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington that specify: • Where ground applications are permitted: • Where aerial applications are permitted • Winds speeds during application are to be less than 10mph .• Agricultural uses will have a minimum of 20 feet of non-crop vegetation on the downhill side of the application areas immediately adjacent to any surface water that have a connection to salmonid bearing waters. • Do not apply products when soil moisture is at field capacity of when a weather event is likely to produce run-off from the application site within 48 hours of application • Report all incidents of fish mortality that occur within 4 days of application and within the vicinity of the application area. More information about the NMFS biological opinion may be found at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/pesticide biop.pdf Malathion use as a larvicide is restricted under Ecology's aquatic mosquito control permit. It is not permitted for use as an adulticide. Malathion may only be used for control of mosquito larvae with Ecology approval after consultation between Ecology and DOH in response to a public health emergency. This limits the amount and times that malathion may be discharged to surface waters to only times when human health becomes a priority. Temephos Temephos is a broad spectrum, non-systemic organophosphate insecticide. It is registered for use only as a mosquito larvicide. It is a hydrophobic chemical but does bioaccumulate. Nearly 75% oftemephos that is bioaccumulated is eliminated over time with no exposure. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 19 Temephos is not very persistent in water, but binds tightly to soils and sediments, though its degredants do not which could lead to continued suspension or re-suspension in water .. Half-life in soil is estimated at 30 days. Like other organophosphates, Temephos works by disrupting the central nervous system through .cholinesterase inhibition. It has a lower toxicity to mammals, but cholinesterase inhibition and reduced liver weights are noted in chronic exposure studies. Testing with rat found that while some temephos remained in the body, most of it was eliminated through feces and urine unchanged. Symptoms of poisoning include headache, sweating, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, loss of coordination, difficulty breathing, and death. Depending on product formulation, temephos is moderately to very highly toxic beneficial insects and aquatic organisms (both vertebrates and invertebrates) during acute and chronic testing. It is also moderately to highly toxic to some species of birds. Temephos use as a larvicide is restricted under Ecology's Permit. It is not permitted for use as an adulticide. Temephos may only be used for control of mosquito larvae in non-potable, highly polluted water, water with a high organic contentment (such as sewage lagoons, manure lagoons, or pastures, all of which must have no surface water run-off), or in response to pesticide resistance development within a specific population of mosquitoes. Ecology must approve the use oftemephos after consultation between Ecology, DOH, WDFW and WSDA in response to a public health emergency or pesticide resistance. This limits the amount and times that temephos may be discharged to surface waters to only times when human health becomes a priority. Adulticides The Permit authorizes the incidental discharge of several adulticide active ingredients when an entity is working to control vector mosquitoes. Discharges are not allowed for nuisance mosquito applications. The active ingredients included for use the permit are Permethrin, Resmethrin, Sumithrin (d-phenothrin), Natural Pyrethrins, Naled, and Piperonyl Butoxide (PBO). Pyrethrins and Pyrethroid/28-35,57,59,60) Natural Pyrethrins are compounds isolated from the chrysanthemum flower (Chrysanthemum cinerariaefolium) with insecticidal properties. A number of synthetic derivatives have been created from pyrethrins and are referred to as "pyrethroids." Pyrethroids are more UV stable (resist UV degradation) and cost effective to produce. As a group, pyrethrins and pyrethroids all have a similar mode of action. These chemicals interfere with nerve cell sodium channels that serve as part of the nervous system communication system, but it is unknown if all pyrethroids alter the same sodium channels. Pyrethroids have a very low toxicity to humans and other larger mammals. EPA lists pyrethroid compounds as class 3 or 4 depending on exposure route for acute testing. Class 3 pesticides are rated slightly toxic by EPA, while class 4 is practically non-toxic. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 20 Pyrethroids are toxic to beneficial insects such as butterflies, moths, and bee's. Insects of similar size (midges) may see an increase in mortality after pesticide application. Larger insects may also be affected. LDso mortality is seen in AJ)iS Mellifera (the domestic honeybee) at an average· of 0.08 micrograms(ug)/bee permethrin.(36,4 EPA lists toxicity to bees from permethrin for dermal exposure at LDso = O.IJug/bee and oral exposure at LDso = 0.024 ug/bee. EPA lists pyrethroids as highly toxic to very highly toxic to aquatic organisms. Results from acute testing of active ingredients on freshwater fish range from LCso 0.28 to 5.1 ppb. Chronic toxicity with freshwater invertebrates lists results for No Observed Adverse Effect Concentration (NOAEC) at 0.039 to 0.86 ppb. Pyrethroids have a high affinity to binding to soils, waterbody sediments and suspended sediments. This high affinity to binding should greatly reduce the likelihood thatpyrethroids will leach into groundwater but also reduces the chance for the pyrethroids to degrade due to UV light. PiperonyJ Butoxide (27,57,59,60) Piperonyl Butoxide is a chemical that is added to many pesticide formulations. It increases the effect of pyrethrins and pyrethroids by acting as a synergist. PBO increases the insecticidal properties by reducing the effectiveness ofthe detoxification enzyme that works to eliminate pyrethroids from an insects system. This reduces the dose of pyrethroids necessary to cause mortality in mosquitoes other insects and some small mammals (rats, mice). PBO is only slightly toxic to humans and other larger mammals, though some transient enzyme inhibition is observed. The target organ being the liver, chronic exposure leading to increases in liver weight. PBO also has a low to very low toxicity to birds. As a single chemical test, PBO is moderately toxic to aquatic organisms. Acute testing of freshwater fish and invertebrates with aLCso's of 1.9 and 0.51ppm respectively. NOAEC's have also been estimated for PBO at 0.04ppm for freshwater fish and 0.03 for freshwater invertebrates. . PBO is not used as an adulticide or insecticide as a single active ingredient but always in as a synergist for a primary active ingredient. NaJed29,57,5!J,60) Naled is a broad spectrum, non-systemic organophosphate insecticide. It is registered for use as a mosquito aduIticide. Naled has one metabolite that is also an organophosphate pesticide registered with EPA: dichlorvos (DDVP). Like other organophosphates, Naled works by disrupting the central nervous system through cholinesterase inhibition. Symptoms of poisoning include headache, sweating, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, loss of coordination, difficulty breathing, and death. Naled is moderately to highly toxic to birds, highly toxic to non-target insects (such as honeybees), moderately to very highly toxic to aquatic organisms and moderately toxic to Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 21 , mammals on an acute basis, with some chronic effects. Naled use as an adulticide is restricted under Ecology's Permit. It is not permitted for use as a larvicide. Naled may only be used for control of adult in response to pyrethroid resistance development within a specific population of mosquitoes. An example of a specific population would be,the population of mosquitoes that breed in a single waterbody. Ecology must approve the use ofNaled after consultation between Ecology, DOH, WDFW and WSDA in response to a public health emergency or pesticide resistance. This limits the amount and times thattemephos may be discharged to surface waters to only times when human health becomes a priority. Pesticide Registration Licensing Information The purpose of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) is to provide federal control of use, distribution and sale of pesticide products in the U.S. All pesticides used in the United States must be registered (licensed) by EPA. Registration helps insure that pesticides will be properly labeled and that, ifused in accordance with label specifications, they will not cause unreasonable harm to the environment. To register a new pesticide, manufacturers of pesticides must present EPA with technical information supporting the proposed pesticide uses such as risk to humans and the environment, and frequency of use. After review by EPA, a pesticide is registered for narrowly defined uses (e.g. specific crops). Because of the continually increasing knowledge of pesticides and their effects, EPA's goal is to review pesticide registrations every 15 years. More information about FIFRA pesticide registration may be found at http://www.epa.gov/oecaagctllfra.html#Registration%200f.1020N ew%20Pesticides. FIFRA requires certification of all persons who apply pesticides classified as restricted use. Commercial and public applicators must pass an examination to demonstrate practical knowledge' of the principles and practices of pest control and safe use of pesticides. Applicators using or supervising the use of any restricted use pesticides applied to standing or running water (excluding applicators engaged in public health related activities) must pass an additional exam to demonstrate competency as described in the code of federal regulations 40 CFR 171.4. In addition to FIFRA requirements, the State of Washington requires pesticides be registered for use with the State Department of Agriculture (WSDA), and that pesticide applicators be licensed through WSDA. Any person wishing to apply EPA-registered pesticides to Washington State waters mlist be licensed as an aquatic pesticide applicator or operate under the direct supervision of a State licensed applicator. For information on Washington State licensing requirements and testing, see the following website: http://www.agr.wa.govlPestFertiLicensingEdiLicensing.htm. Information about pesticide registration in Washington State may be found at http://www .agr. wa. gov lPestF ertlPesticideslProductRegistration.aspx#W sdaReg. REGULATORY INFORMATION Regulatory Pollution Reduction Requirements Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 22 ·Federal and State regulations require that effluent limits in an NPDES permit must be either technology or water quality-based. • Technology-based limits are based upon the treatment methods available to treat specific pollutants. Technology-based limits are set by the EPA and published as a regulation, or Ecology develops the limit on a case-by-case basis (40 CFR 125.3, and chapter 173-226 WAC). • Water quality-based limits are calculated so that the effluent will comply with the Surface Water Quality Standards (chapter 173-201A WAC), Ground Water Standards (chapter 173- 200 WAC), Sediment Quality Standards (chapter 173-204 WAC) or the National Toxics Rule (40 CFR 131.36). • Ecology must apply the most stringent of these limits to each parameter of concern. These limits are described below. Technology Based Water Quality Protection Requirements Sections 301, 302, 306, and 307 of the FWPCA established discharge standards, prohibitions, and limits based on pollution control technologies. These technology-based limits are "best practical control technology" (BPT), "best available technology economically achievable" (BAT), and "best conventional pollutant control technology economically achievable" (BCT). Permit writers may also determine·compliance with BPTIBATIBCT using their "best professional judgment" (BP J). Washington has similar technology-based limits described as "all known, available and reasonable methods of control, prevention, and treatment (AKART)" methods. State law refers to AKART under RCW 90.48.010, RCW 90.48.520, 90.52.040 and RCW 90.54.020. The Federal technology-based limits and AKART are similar, but not equivalent. Ecology may establish AKART: • . For an industrial category or for an individual permit on a case-by-case basis. • That is more stringent than Federal regulations. • That includes BMPs such as prevention and control methods (Le. waste minimization, waste/source reduction, or reduction in total contaminant releases to the environment). Ecology and the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concur that, historically, most discharge permits have determined AKART as equivalent to BPJ determinations. EPA has regulated the pesticide application industry under the terms of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). EPA developed label use requirements to regulate the use of pesticides. EPA also requires the pesticide manufacturer to register each pesticide, .~ provide evidence that the pesticide will work as promised, and minimize unacceptable environmental harm. The standards for environmental protection are different between the Clean Water Act and FIFRA. It is the intent of this general permit to authorize mosquito control in a manner that complies with all federal and other state requirements. All wastewater discharge permits issued by Ecology must incorporate requirements to implement reasonable prevention, treatment and control of pollutants. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 23 " The Washington Pesticide Control Act (Chapter 15.58 RCW) states that "the formulation, distribution, storage, transportation, and disposal of any pesticide and the dissemination of accurate scientific information as to the proper use, or nonuse, of any pesticide, is important and vital to the maintenance of a high level of public health and welfare both immediate and future, and is hereby declared to be a business affected with the public interest. The provisions of this chapter are enacted in the exercise of the police powers of the state for the purpose of protecting the immediate and future health and welfare of the people of the state." Both the state and federal government regulate the pesticides allowed for use under this permit. Ecology acknowledges that applicators could, with great difficulty, treat the pollutants addressed in this permit due to the diffuse nature and low concentrations that exist after the pesticides have become waste. The Headwaters Inc. v. Talent ruling established that aquatic pesticides become waste in the water after the pesticide has performed its intended action and the target organisms are controlled or if excess pesticide is present during treatment. Applicators may need to treat waters where pesticide residues threaten to cause unacceptable environmental harm in some situations, but not routinely. Surface Water Quality-Based Effluent Limits The Washington State Surface Water Quality Standards (chapter 173-201A WAC) were designed to protect existing water quality and preserve the beneficial uses of Washington's surface waters. Waste discharge permits must include conditions that ensure the discharge will meet established surface water quality standards (WAC 173-20 lA-51 0). Water quality-based effluent limits may be based on an individual waste load allocation or on a waste load allocation developed during a basin wide total maximum daily loading study (TMDL). Numerical Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Life and Recreation Numerical water quality criteria are published in the Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters (chapter 173-20 lA WAC). They specify the levels of pollutants allowed in receiving water to protect aquatic life and recreation in and on the water. Ecology uses numerical criteria along with chemical and physical data for the wastewater and receiving water to derive the effluent limits in the discharge permit. When surface water quality-based limits are more stringent or potentially more stringent than technology-based limits, the discharge must meet the water quality-based limits. Numerical Criteria for the Protection of Human Health The U.S. EPA has published 91 numeric water quality criteria for the protection of human health that are applicable to dischargers in Washington State (40 CFR 131.36). These criteria are designed to protect humans from exposure to pollutants linked to cancer and other diseases, based on consuming fish and shellfish and drinking contaminated surface waters. The Water Quality Standards also include radionuclide criteria to protect humans from the effects of radioactive substances. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 24 Narrative Criteria Narrative water quality criteria ( e.g., WAC 173-20 lA-240(l); 2006) limit the toxic, radioactive, or other deleterious material concentrations that the facility may discharge to levels below those which have the potential to: • Adversely affect designated water uses. • Cause acute or chronic toxicity to biota. • Impair aesthetic values. • Adversely affect human health. Narrative criteria protect the specific designated uses of all fresh waters (WAC 173-20IA-200, 2006) and of all marine waters (WAC 173-201A-210,; 2006) in the State of Washington. Antidegradation The purpose ofWashirigton's Antidegradation Policy (WAC 173-20iA-300-330; 2006) is to: • Restore and maintain the highest possible quality of the surface waters of Washington. • Describe situations under which water quality may be lowered from its current condition. • Apply to human activities that are likely to have an impact on the water quality of surface water. • Ensure that all human activities likely to contribute to a lowering of water quality, at a minimum, apply all known, available, and reasonable methods of prevention, control, and treatment (AKAR T). • Apply three Tiers of protection (described below) for surface waters of the state. Tier I ensures existing and designated uses are maintained and protected and applies to all waters and all sources of pollutions. Tier II ensures that dischargers do not degrade waters of a higher quality than the criteria assigned unless such lowering of water quality is necessary and in the overriding public interest. Tier II applies only to a specific list of polluting activities. Tier III prevents the degradation of waters formally listed as "outstanding resource waters," and applies to all sources of pollution. Ecology considered Tier I and Tier II in this permit and determined that the permit does not cover discharges to Tier III waters. Tier I applies water quality-based limits to point source discharges and is discussed below. Tier II.requirements for general permits are given in 173-20IA-320(6) as follows: (a) Individual activities covered under these general permits or programs will not require a Tier II analysis. (b) The department will describe in writing how the general permit or control program meets the antidegradation requirements of this section. (c) The department recognizes that many water quality protection programs and their associated control technologies are in a continual state of improvement and development. As a result, information regarding the existence, effectiveness, or costs of control practices for reducing pollution and meeting the water quality standards may be incomplete. In these instances, the antidegradation requirements of this section can be considered met for general permits and programs that have a formal process to select, develop, adopt, and refine control practices for protecting water quality and Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 25 .~ . meeting the intent of this section. This adaptive process must: (i) Ensure that information is developed and used expeditiously to revise permit or program requirements; (ii) Review and refine management and control programs in cycles not to exceedfive years or the period of permit reissuance; and (iii) Include a plan that describes how information will be obtained and used to ensure full compliance with this chapter. The plan must be developed and documented in advance of permit or program approval under this section. (7) All authorizations under this section must still comply with the provisions of Tier I (WAC 173-201A-3JO). . This fact sheet describes how the permit and control program meets the anti degradation requirement. Evaluation of Surface Water Quality-based Emuent Limits for Numeric Criteria Ecology made a reasonable potential determination on the application of larvicides approved for use in the draft permit based upon Ecology contracted risk assessments for each larvicide active ingredient. Ecology has determined that application of the approved larvicides will not violate water quality standards or degrade existing uses if applicators follow permit BMPS and FIFRA label requirements Ecology made a reasonable potential determination on the application of adulticides based upon knowledge of mosquito control practices and published research. It based this decision on calculations using available information. Ecology has determined that the application of adulticides will not violate water quality standards or degrade existing uses if applied as described during discussions with MCDs and during deposition studies (see bibliography) and if applicators follow permit BMPS and FIFRA label requirements. In summary, Ecology has determined that if applicators properly apply and handle larvicides and adulticides in accordance with the terms and conditions of the general permit, the mosquito control activities will: • Comply with State water quality standards. • Maintain and protect the existing and designated uses of the surface waters of the State. • Protect human health. New information regarding previously unknown environmental and human health risks may cause Ecology to reopen the general permit. The short-term water quality exceedance provisions of the draft permit allows the larvicide discharges authorized by the general permit to cause a temporary diminishment of some designated beneficial uses while it alters the water body to protect public health and promote public enjoyment and quality of life. A short-term exceedance only applies to short lived (hours or days) impairments, but short-term exceedances remain available throughout the permit term. Short term exceedances for the discharge of larvicides may extent over the 5-year life span of the permit (long-term exceedance) provided the Permittee satisfies the requirements of WAC 173- 20IA-41O, The Permittee must develop and implement an integrated pest management (IPM) plan that follows the Administrative Procedures Act (chapter 34.05 RCW) for public involvement and complete a Sate Environmental Policy Act (chapter 43.21C RCW) evaluation Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet-February 3,2010 Page 26 I. .' of the proposed activity. The activities authorized by this general permit do not have a reasonable potential to cause a violation of state water quality standards (WAC 173-201A) so long as Ecology allows the activities under the short-term water quality exceedance provision. The water quality modification provides for an exception to meeting certain provisions of the state water quality standards, such as meeting all beneficial uses all the time. Activities covered under this permit are allocated a temporary zone of impact on beneficial uses, but the impact must be transient (hours or days), and must allow for full restoration of water quality and protection of beneficial uses upon project completion. The conditions of this permit constitute the requirements of a short-term water quality exceedance. Washington's water quality standards now include 91 numeric health-based criteria that Ecology must consider when writing NPDES permits. The U.S. EPA established these criteria in 1992 in its National Toxics Rule (40 CFR 131.36). Ecology has determined that the Permittee's discharge does not contain chemicals of concern based on existing data or knowledge. Chemicals of concern may be part of the "other ingredients" listed on FIFRA labels. Ecology does not have access to the "other ingredients" because they are proprietary. Sediment Quality The aquatic sediment standards (WAC 173-204) protect aquatic biota and human health. Under these standards, Ecology may require a facility to evaluate the potential for its discharge to cause a violation of sediment standards (WAC 173-204-400). You can obtain additional information about sediments at the Aquatic Lands Cleanup Unit website. http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/tcp/smu/sediment.html Ecology has determined through a review of the discharger characteristics and effluent characteristics that this discharge has no reasonable potential to violate the Sediment Management Standards. SEP A Compliance Mosquito control activities have undergone numerous environmental impact evaluations. The draft permit conditions the uses of pesticides to mitigate environmental impacts of concern noted in these evaluations. The conditions of this permit should satisfy any water quality related SEPA concerns. Endangered Species EPA has implemented the Endangered Species Protection Program to identify all pesticides that .. when used may cause adverse impacts on threatened/endangered species and to implement measures that will mitigate identified adverse impacts. When an adverse impact is identified, the Endangered Species Protection Program requires use restrictions to protect endangered/threatened species at the county level. EPA will specify these use restrictions on the product label or by distributing a county specific Endangered Species Protection Bulletin specified on the product label. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3,2010 Page 27 Ecology has further limited the application of pesticides for mosquito control in areas identified by WDFW as being critical habitat for state and federal endangered, candidate, threatened and sensitive species. In most cases, applicators may use Bacillus spp. based larvicides but must obtain Ecology and WDFW approval before using all other larvicides in critical habitats. Applicators must not use adulticides in critical habitat areas unless Ecology approves the use due to a human health issue. Based upon annual reporting of pesticide use and other available information, Ecology may further restrict pesticide use to protect endangered, threatened, candidate and sensitive species such as pacific salmonids. PROPSED PERMIT CONDITIONS S1. Permit Coverage Activities Covered Under This Permit All entities that participate in mosquito control activities that result in discharge of pollutants to waters of the state must have coverage under the Permit as required by Washington laws (90.48.080,90.48.160 and 90.48.260 RCW, 173-226-020 WAC). The discharges requiring permit coverage may be direct or indirect. An example of direct discharge is the application of larvicides directly to waters of the state. An indirect example is the incidental discharge of adulticides (for vector mosquito control) to waters of the state for applications that do not directly target surface waters of the state. Activities covered under a Federal Experimental Use Permit must also apply for permit coverage Activities That May Not Need Coverage Under this Permit Ecology has determined not to issue permit coverage for retention and detention ponds if: 1. Ecology regulates its discharge under an'other permit (such as industrial or municipal stormwater permits) and the permit allows chemical t~eatment. 2. There is no discharge to surface waters within two weeks of treatment. Ecology has determined not to issue permit coverage for constructed water bodies or upland farm ponds if: 1. The water bodies are five acres or less in surface area, and 2. There is no discharge to surface waters within two weeks of treatment. Ecology has determined not to issue permit coverage for seasonally dry wetlands if: 1. The wetland is dry at the time of treatment and for two weeks following treatment, and 2. The chemical will not be biologically available when the area is inundated with water. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet-February 3,2010 Page 28 Ecology has determined not to issue permit coverage for standing water on irrigated fields if: 1. Irrigation is not occurring at the time of application so that there is no direct run-off to surface waters of the state or run off to waters of the state through irrigation return flows. 2. The chemical will not be biologically available during irrigation following application of pesticides. Ecolqgy believes that the two-week holding time sufficiently allows the dissipation of the . pesticide prodlicts prior to possible discharge to surface waters. Ecology believes that if applicators meet these conditions, the treatment poses no potential to violate the Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of The State of Washington (chapter 173-201A WAC). The draft permit describes these situations so as not to burden Ecology and the mosquito control entities by oversight and permit requirements in situations where Ecology has pre-determined a discharge will not occur. Geographic Area Covered The draft Permi~ applies to the application of pesticides for mosquito control to surface waters anywhere in the State of Washington where Ecology has authority. Ecology defines surface waters of the state as "lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, salt waters, wetlands, and all other surface waters and water courses within the jurisdiction of the state of Washington (90.48.020 RCW, 173-201A-020 and 173-226-030 WAC)." Depending on species, mosquitoes have the potential to breed in any water of the state. These sites include, but are not limited to, riparian areas, wetlands, marshes, rivers, year round and seasonal streams, lakes, ponds, wet pastures, brackish areas, and estuaries. Washington State Department of Health Blanket Permit Coverage Adefinition of "Permittee" is not provided in chapter 90.48 RCW, chapters 173-216, 173-220, or 173-226 WAC, nor is one provided in 40 CFR 122 (EPA NPDES Permit Program) or 123 (State NPDES Permit Programs). Based upon the usage of Permittee in federal and Washington State law, Ecology takes the term "Permittee" to mean "the person or entity that discharges or controls the discharge ofpo!lutants to waters of the state (surface or ground) and holds permit coverage allowing that specific discharge." . When Ecology issued the current Permit in 2007, it issued coverage to Washington State Department of Health, and three other separate entities (Columbia Mosquito Control District, Seattle Public Utilities, and Pierce County Public Utility District). Ecology issued DOH blanket coverage for the entire state. DOH contracted with numerous other entities (referred to as "limited agents") to actually perform the pesticide applications for mosquito control. The limited agents under DOH blanket coverage were responsible for applying mosquito control pesticides in compliance with the terms of the permit, but were not directly responsible for permit violations as Permittees, or responsible for the permit fees associated with having a coverage that allows discharge to waters of the state. Ecology has determined that DOH does not meet the definition' of Permittee. It is not directly in control ofthe pesticide discharges (the limited agents are), but because it holds permit coverage is liable for any violations of permit conditions. DOH is also responsible for the permit fees (90.48.465 RCW, chapter 173.224 WAC) associated with Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 20]0 Page 29 coverage under the permit. In the draft 2010 Permit, Ecology changed who must obtain coverage. Current limited agents must obtain permit coverage directly from Ecology because they (and not DOH) discharge the pollutants. Ecology has retained the separate permit coverages for Columbia Mosquito Control District, Seattle Public Utilities and Pierce County Public Utility District under the updated 2010 Permit because they meet the definition of Permittee. After the effective date of the 2010 Permit, limited agents will have 60 days to transfer coverage from DOH. Transferring coverage from DOH after the effective date of the permit limits unnecessary paperwork associated with having limited agents move to separate coverages. To transfer coverage, the limited agents and DOH must fill out and sign the transfer form provided as Permit Appendix C, then submit the completed form to Ecology. Each limited agent must complete a transfer form, or in the case of commercial applicators, for each area that they cover under a different contract. If limited agents do not transfer their coverage as described above, then they are no longer authorized to discharge any pesticide to waters of the state until it gains coverage under the updated Permit. Should tl)e applicator continue to discharge pesticide to waters of the state without permit coverage, Ecology will consider the discharge as a discharge without a permit (90.48.080 and 90.48.160 RCW and 173-226-020 WAC). The unpermitted applicator will be subject to enforcement activities (90.48.140 and 90.48.142 RCW and 173-226-250W AC), such as fines up to $lO,OOO/day for discharges without Permit coverage. An applicator that does not complete a transfer or permit coverage from DOH within the 60 days and still wants conduct mosquito control applications must begin the permitting process as a new permittee, completing the required permit coverage application steps (such as SEPA review and public notice) as detailed in Permit Section S2. S2:Permit Application Requirements Ecology plans to issue the Permit for a period of5 years, starting on the effective date of the permit (WAC 173-226-330). Coverage under the Permit will last from the date of coverage to the date of permit expiration, which will be up to 5 years. New Applicants for Permit Coverage A new applicant is any entity that proposes to discharge pesticide into waters of the state for the purpose of mosquito control, but does not have permit coverage at the time Ecology issued the updated Permit in 2010. New applicants that do not have permit coverage must submit a complete application for permit coverage a minimum of 60 days before applying pesticides that result in discharge to waters ofthe state. A new permit applicant must submit a complete application including a Notice of Intent (NOI), a completed SEPA (chapter 197-11 WAC) checklist. An official who has signature authority (173-226-200 WAC) for the entity applying for permit coverage must sign both documents. Ecology must receive the complete application for permit coverage on or before the publication date of the public notice the permit applicant posted in a newspaper of general circulation (173- Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 30 226-130 WAC). Ecology considers a newspaper of general circulation as the major newspaper publication for a region. When Ecology receives s the new applicant's complete application before public notice it can review the application and communicate necessary changes on application documents. Communication (prior to publishing public notice) about document changes can save the applicant money by identifying necessary changes before the applicant publishes public notice and then needs to re-public notice due to substantive changes on the application. The public has the opportunity to comment on the permit application and the proposed coverage during the 30 days after publication of the public notice (public comment period). Ecology will consider comments about the applicability of the Permit to the proposed activity received during this period. If Ecology receives no substantive comments, it will issue permit coverage on the 61 st day following receipt of a complete application. S3. Discharge Limits The 2010 Permit includes different discharge limits for larvicides and adulticides. Ecology made these changes because Permittees apply larvicides directly to water, and because it added requirements for adulticide use limiting application to when human health is known to be threatened based on environmental monitoring and mosquito surveillance. In 2006, Ecology updated the Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the State of Washington (Chapter 173-201A WAC). Ecology proposes to change the limits in the 2010 permit to reflect these changes. The standards now allow a temporary exceedance of water quality standards for up to 5 years (the term of a general permit) provided the Permittee has followed certain guidelines. WAC 173-20 lA-41 0(2) requires that in order for Ecology to extend the exceedance for up to 5 years, and not limit it to hours or days, the Permittee must develop and implement an integrated pest management plan. The Permittee must develop the plan following the Administrative Procedures Act for public involvement (chapter 34.05 RCW) and must complete a State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43.21C RCW and Chapter 197-11 WAC) review of the proposed activity. Permittees who do not meet these requirements must ensure that the short-term exceedance of water quality standards is limited to only hours or days. Because this is a requirement of the permit and state law, the public, through Ecology, may request the integrated pest management plan developed by the Permittee during a public disclosure request. Ecology may also request the plan. Ecology has determined that adulticides, used in compliance with FIFRA, AKART, and that only generate incidental discharges during vector mosquito control do not have a reasonable potential to violate water quality standards. A temporary exceedance of water quality standards allowed for in Chapter'173-201A WAC only applies to discharges that will otherwise violate water quality standards. Based on Ecology's determination that the potential to violated water quality standards is low, Ecology has not included a temporary exceedance ofthe water quality standards under 173-201A-41O WAC in the Permit. Any adulticide application for vector mosquitoes covered under this permit must not cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 31 " S4. Larvicide Use The larvicide use conditions included in the 2010 Penn it are largely unchanged from the pennit issued in 2007. Ecology made one substantive change. Ecology removed the pennit condition that authorized the use of new active ingredients not included in the issued pennit for three reasons: • Adding new active ingredients to an issued pennit is a major modification of the pennit conditions. Ecology must notify the public when it issues major modifications using a public involvement process (173-226-230 WAC). • Since Ecology issued the first Penn it in 2002, it has not added any active ingredients to the pennit at the request of Pennittees outside the penn it development process. If Permittees request additional active ingredients after issuance of the 2010 Penn it, they must request that Ecology re-open and modify the existing pennit to include those active ingredients. ,Inclusion of new active ingredients will depend on Ecology review of the literature available about the specific active ingredient. • Ecology does not currently have the resources to review risk assessments outside of the penn it development process. Ecologyhas retained the methoprene use restrictions in Pennit Appendix B areas at the request of Washington State Department ofFish and Wildlife. Experimental Use of Larvicides Use of larvicides under both federal and state experimental use penn its (EUP) is included in the Pennit. Federal EUPs are issued only in the context of a research and development effort for a new pesticide not currently registered with EPA (FIFRA Section 3) or for the registration of a new use of a currently registered pesticide (40 CFR 172.2). Research sites may be more than 10 acres of land, but aquatic sites are limited to a total of 1 acre or less for the entire state. Only the holder of the federal EUP may use and apply the pesticide being researched. You can find the fu,Il requirements for federal EUPs at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text- idx?c=ecfr&sid=908f9afd6be4e31b 7 d6bc89b84aed2 7 a&rgn=div5&view=text&node=40 :23.0.1. 1.22&idno=40. Washington State law (WAC 16-228-1460) requires that State issued individual EUPs have a Federal EUP. State Collective EUPs are limited to 1 acre or less. S5. Adulticide Use for Nuisance and Vector Control Nuisance Mosquito Control The daft pennit does not authorize the discharge of any aduiticide for nuisance mosquito control. Ecology made this decision for several reasons. FIFRA labels list the ingredients included in a pesticide product fonnulation as "active" and "inert," though the use of inert is changing to the use of "other." The active ingredient is the chemical in a fonnulation that provides the pesticidal properties. FIFRA regulations define inert Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 32 .~., ingredients as chemicals included in a pesticide fonnulation to increase the effectiveness of the active ingredient. Therefore, t\ley may have environmental effects, even if not a direct effect. Because these other ingredients are unknown due to their proprietary nature, Ecology cannot detennine their affects in the environment for pennitting purposes. EPA plans to propose a rule that would require disclosure of all inert/other ingredients in a pesticide fonnulation to the public. At the time of writing, you can find more infonnation about this rule making at http://www .epa.gov /opprdOO l/inerts/#disclosure. Ecology is concerned that inert/other ingredients contained in pesticide fonnulations could have unknown effects in the environment. Currently, EPA has assessed the risk of the active ingredient in pesticide formulations. This risk assessment does not take into account the "other" or "inert" ingredients that make up a pesticide fonnulation and the interactions these chemicals (alone or in combination) may have with the environment. Chemical interactions may have additive, synergistic or negative interactions with each other. • An additive interaction occurs when the effect of two (or more) different active ingredients added together cause the mortality seen. • A negative interaction occurs when two (or more) active ingredients inhibit each other's effectiveness resulting in less effect overall. • A synergistic effect occurs when two (or more) chemicals interact in such a way that additive interaction cannot explain the increase in effectiveness. The interaction of the chemicals would result in a multiplicative increase (by some factor) in effectiveness. An example of synergy is the addition ofPBO to pyrethroid-based fonnulations to increase their effectiveness. PBO blocks the enzyme that would stop the pyrethroid from acting, thereby increasing the effectiveness of the pyrethroid (factor of increase unknown). . The draft pennit requires discharges to comply with water quality standards. Because of the unknowns in adulticide fonnulations, Ecology cannot detennine with reasonable certainty that regular applications of adulticides to control nuisance mosquitoes will not cause violations of water quality standards (chapter 173-201A WAC). In addition, of Ecology includes adulticide use for nuisance mosquitoes that allows a discharge it would need to set eftluent limits and include monitoring of the eftluent at least once a year. Monitoring for effluent from adulticide applications is a difficult task and water sample analysis for pyrethroids using Gas ChromatographylMass Spectroscopy costs between $400 and $600 per sample according to Ecology's Manchester Laboratory. Commercial laboratories may charge less. ELISA tests for pyrethroids are available, but have a quantitation range of 1-80 ppb, which is above the level of some acute and chroniC environmental effects. Monitoring for adulticides is a difficult and costly task. Entities can monitor deposition of adulticides by using fiber pads placed in an application area. Adulticide that falls out of the air column in the application area deposits on the pads, which the entity can then collect and analyze for the presence and concentration of adulticide. Monitoring of actual deposition to a water body is especially difficult where the water body is a river or stream (moving water). By the time the entity completes application the potentially polluted water has already moved down stream, mixing and diluting along the way. This makes any sample taken at an application site meaningless. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 33 In future permit cycles, Ecology may consider authorizing the limited discharge of adulticides and their residues to waters of the-state for nuisance mosquito control. For this to occur, the pesticide product formulations proposed for use, including those authorized for use in vector mosquito control, must undergo a risk assessment prior to inclusion in a future permit. Due to resource issues, it is unlikely that Ecology will conduct, or contract out risk assessments for the near future. If other entities choose to pursue a risk assessment, for each pesticide product formulation, they must: _ . 1. Prepare an assessment independent of the risk assessment conducted by EPA on the active ingredient during the registration process. 2. Address risks and concerns specific to Washington State. 3. Address the acute and chronic toxicity in the environment from the entire pesticide product formulation on the most sensitive organisms. 4. Include all formulation ingredients in the product, such as: a. Active ingredients; b. Inert ingredients; c. Other ingredients; d. Synergists; e. Solvents; f. All other additives 5. Take into account the ambient or background levels of pesticides in sediments and waters of the state from human activities. 6. Include toxicity testing and an intended use plan explaining how toxic threshold concentrations will be avoided in waters of the state. The toxicity testing and intended use plan must be generally based upon Appendix G of Laboratory Guidance and Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Review Criteria, Ecology Publication No. WQ-R-95-80. 7. Include any other information Ecology determines is necessary to evaluate the risk associated with the use of a pesticide product formulation. 8. Use a qualified toxicologist with experience in environmental toxicology. 9. Obtain Ecology approval. Vector Mosquito Control Ecology has only authorized the incidental discharge of adulticides during vector mosquito control in this permit. Incidental discharge is the minimum amount of adulticide deposition possible to surface waters of the state during properly conducted pesticide applications (in accordance with this permit and the FIFRA label) for controlling vector mosquitoes. Ecology made this decision to balance the importance of environmental health and human health. Ecology is making allowances for the control of mosquitoes that are spreading acknowledged diseases to humans to protect public health. Currently, DOH data shows that only West Nile virus (WNV), St Louis (SLE), and Western Equine Encephalitis (WEE) are endemic in Washington Permit. DOH also commented that diseases could migrate to new locations. Based on these comments, Ecology addressed generic mosquito born disease, not specific diseases, in the draft 2010 Permit When DOH determines and acknowledges that a disease is mosquito born (specific to a species or several species of mosquitoes), and endemic or epidemic, then Ecology will consider those mosquitoes as vectors for purposes of this permit. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 34 · .. Ecology has not excluded the option of including monitoring or studies through the administrative order process should adulticide use be different from currently available information or if environmental impacts are reported. Depending on the level of organized mosquito surveillance in an area, the draft permit includes different requirements for meeting the threshold for using adulticides to control vector mosquitoes. Ecology made this decision to reduce the time and steps necessary to move forward with vector mosquito control when public health is threatened. Areas with a Mosquito· Control Districts The creation of a mosquito control district is a public process outlined in chapter 17.28 RCW. A MCD is actually a quasi-governmental agency that has the authority to tax the public within the jurisdiction of the MCD. MCDs have the knowledge and experience with mosquito control in their district that allows it to best factor in all the variables to determine when adult vector mosquito control is necessary. The Permit requirements take this knowledge and experience into account, and allow relative autonomy for the MCD to make application decisions based on mosquito surveillance, monitoring of disease indicators in the environment (such as through the vector-borne disease notifications lists through DOH) and within the requirements of the permit. Prior to the development of the draft permit, Ecology discussed with DOH how to determine when it should allow application of adulticides. DOH suggested Ecology use Alert Level 3 from the West Nile Virus Outbreak Response Plan as the point at which Ecology should allow adulticiding for WNV vector mosquitoes. Attempting to balance human health and environmental health, Ecology included this level as the point at which it would allow adulticiding because the level represents a more significant threat to public health than level 1 or 2. Areas without MCDs or organized mosquito programs In areas without a MCD or other organized mosquito surveillance, the Permittee depends on the professional expertise of Washington State Department of Health to look at the environmental factors related to mosquito borne disease to determine if the situation requires intervention by using adulticides. Experimental Use Permits Use of adulticides under both federal and state experimental use permits (EUP) is included in the Permit. Federal EUPs are issued only in the context of a research and development effort for a new pesticide not currently registered with EPA (FIFRA Section 3) or for the registration of a new use of a currently registered pesticide (40 CFR 172.2). Research sites may be more than 10 acres of land, but aquatic sites are limited to a total of 1 acre or less for the entire state .. Only the holder of the federal EUP may use and apply the pesticide being researched. You can find the full requirements for federal EUPs at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/tltextltext- idx?c=ecfr&sid=908f9afd6be4e31 b7 d6bc89b84aed2 7a&rgn=div5&view=text&node=40:23 .0.1. 1.22&idno=40. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3,2010 Page 35 Washington State law (WAC 16-228-1460) requires that State issued individual EUPs have a Federal EUP. State Collective EUPs are limited to 1 acre or less. S6. Public Notification of Pesticide Use The intent of any public notice is to make the public aware of those activities taking place that have the possibility of affecting them. The intent of this section of the permit is to inform the public of pesticide use for mosquito control and make the public aware of where they can find accurate information about the use of pesticides. For various reasons, individuals in communities wish to limit their exposure to pesticides. For example, some individuals may need information due to chemical sensitivity, others because oflifestyle choices. All members of the public have the right to know when they are exposed to chemicals, so they can make informed decisions about limiting their exposure. Ecology adopted the requirements for public notice, posting, and legal notice of pesticide applications from previous public notification requirements in Ecology-issued orders and short- term modifications. In some cases, Ecology based the public notification requirements on EPA FIFRA label requirements. In all other cases, Ecology based the requirements on its best professional judgment and the public's right to know. The draft permit requires applicators to post notices at all reasonable points of ingress and egress to the treatment areas when applying larVicides with water use restrictions to water bodies that are used for water supply, fish and shellfish harvesting, or water contact activities. Ecology suggests that applicators also post notices at sites that are not directly accessible to the public (e.g. catch basins, storm drains, utility and transportation vaults, etc). Applicators must also make adulticide application area maps available to the public. 87. Monitoring Requirements Ecology requires monitoring, recording, and reporting (WAC 173-226-090 and 40 CFR 122.41) to verify that the treatment process is functioning correctly and that the discharge complies with the permit's effluent limits. Permittees with coverage under the Permit must monitor the amount of pesticides it uses and report the information to Ecology in its annual report (permit section S8). Permittees must also monitor mosquito (surveillance) and other environmental factors to determine when adulticiding for vector mosquitoes is appropriate. Ecology does not currently have a coordinated monitoring program for vector mosquito control. The Permittee describes how it will monitor in its integrated pest management plan and bases monitoring decisions on environmental factors such as mosquito surveillance. Ideally, mosquito surveillance will be central to an environmental monitoring program for mosquito control. Surveillance should include trapping mosquitoes and testing of those mosquitoes for the presence of disease. Adulticiding for vector mosquitoes should only occur when human health is threatened. The draft permit includes dip sampling and requires applicators to maintain records so that they do not treat water bodies unless mosquito larvae are actually present and so that the appropriate Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 36 J. larvicide is used. Over-treatment could lead to pesticide resistance. S8. Reporting Requirements Annual Report Permittees meet part of the monitoring requirements for the purposes of this permit through annual reporting. The annual report summarizes the amount of pesticides used during the course of a treatment season. It allows Ecology to track how much pesticide applicators use in Washington State for a specific use. Section S8 of the permit contains specific conditions based on Ecology's authority to specify any appropriate reporting and recordkeeping requirements to prevent and control waste discharges (WAC 173-226-090). Annual reporting also allows Ecology to determine if pesticide use is increasing or decreasing in the State. Depending on the results from annual reporting, Ecology may require the Permittees to conduct a study to determine effects on the environment from pesticides used in mosquito control that addresses Washington specific issues (such as endangered salmonids). One factor that might cause Ecology to consider requiring a study is if actual adulticide use is much higher than the usage estimated by MCDs, or if adulticides use increases significantly without a public health reason. Records Retention Ecology based permit condition S8 on its authority to specify any appropriate reporting and recordkeeping requirements to prevent and control waste discharges (WAC 173-226-090). Applicators must keep all records and documents required by the MCGP for 5 years. Reporting Permit Violations WAC 173-226-080( 1)( d) states that a discharge of any pollutant more frequently or at a level in excess of that authorized is a permit violation. Ecology requires that if a Permittee violates the permit conditions, it must take steps to stop and minimize any violations and report those violations to Ecology; For pesticide applications authorized in the Permit, applicators must report violations to the Aquatic Pesticide Permit Manger and Regional Spills (ERTS Hotline), within 24 hourS. This allows Ecology to determine if more action is necessary to mitigate the permit violation. wAC 173-226-070 allows Ecology to place impose permit conditions to prevent or control pollutant discharges from plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or materials handling or storage and allows Ecology to require the use of Best management practices (BMPs). BMPs means schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution ofthe waters of the state. BMPs also include treatment requirements, operating procedures, and practices to control plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage from raw material storage. The Permittee must be prepared to mitigate for any potential spills and, in the event of a spill, perform the necessary cleanup, and notify the appropriate Ecology regional office (see RCW 90.48.080, and WAC 173-226-070). Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 37 General Conditions . Ecology bases the General Conditions on state and federal law and regulations. Duty to Reapply All NPDES permits require the Permittee to reapply for coverage 180 days prior to the expiration date of the general permit in accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(d), 40CFR 122.41(b), and WAC 183~226-220(2). For the current Permit (2007), only DOH, Columbia Mosquito Control District, Seattle'Public Utilities, and Pierce County Public Utility District needed to reapply. All Permittees re-applied in a timely manner. To reapply for the permit, the Permittee must complete a new NOI, which is the same form Permittees completed in Secure Access Washington (SAW) when originally applying for permit coverage. Update the information included on the electronic NOI to reflect current operations, print, sign and submit the completed NOI to Ecology's Aquatic Pesticide Permits Manager. The permit lists the mailing address under Permit Section S2.D. PERNUT ISSUANCE PROCEDURES Permit Modifications Ecology may modify this permit to impose new or modified numerical limits, if necessary to meet Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters, Sediment Quality Standards, or Water Quality Standards for Ground Waters, based on new information obtained from sources such as inspections, effluent monitoring, or Ecology approved engineering reports. Ecology may also modify this permit because of new or amended state or federal regulations. Recommendation for Permit Issuance The general permit meets all statutory requirements for authorizing a wastewater discharge, including those limits and conditions believed necessary to control toxics, protect human health, aquatic life, and the beneficial uses of waters of the State of Washington. Ecology proposes to issue this general permit for five (5) years. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 38 GLOSSARY All definitions listed below are for use in the context of this permit only. Active Ingredient: The-ingredient in a pesticide product formulation that provides the insecticidal effects. There may be more than one in a product formulation and may be combined with other additives to iricrease the insecticidal effects. Adjacent: Something or somewhere near but not necessarily right next to something else. Adulticide: A pesticide product designed to target adult mosquitoes and applied using ultra-low volume techniques. Alert Level: Levels assigned by Washington Department of Health to the relative threat of a disease outbreak based on infection rates, time of year, mosquito surveillance and other factors. All Known and Reasonable Technologies (AKART): All known, available, and reasonable methods of pollution control and prevention as described in 90.48.010, 90.48.520, 90.52.040, -and 90.54.020 RCW and 173-201A-020, 173-204-120, 173-204-400, 173-216-020, 173-216-050, 173-216-110, 173-220-130 WAC. Arbovirus/Arboviral: An arthropod born virus or disease. Best Management Practices (BMP): Practices, procedures, techniques, equipment, physical controls or any actions that minimize discharges to waters of the state in addition to permit requirements; may be synonymous with AKART. The Ecology publication "Best Management Practices for Mosquito Control" are BMPs. Blanket Coverage: permit coverage extended to mosquito control entities by Washington Department of Health through their NPDES permit coverage to control mosquitoes in Washington State. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): means a codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the Executive departments and agencies of the Federal Governments. Environmental regulations are in Title 40. Constructed water body: A human-made water body in an area that is not part of a previously existing watercourse, such as ponds, streams, wetlands, etc. Conveyance: means a mechanism for transporting water of wastewater from one location to another location including, but not limited to pipes, ditches, and channels. Detention: means the collection of water into a temporary storage device with the subsequent release of water either at a rate slower than the collection rate, or after a specified time period has passes since the tirne of collection. - DiplDipping: The act of scooping up a small amount of water and examining it for the presence/absence of mosquito larvae. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 39 Discharge: The addition of any pollutant to a water of the state. Discharger: means an owner or operator of any 'facility', 'operation', or activity subject to regulation under chapter 90.48 RCW. An 'entity' or 'mosquito control entity' may be a discharger. Encephalitis: Inflammation of the brain. Entity(s): Who is in control of pesticide applications, would apply for permit coverage and includes, but is not limited to Mosquito Control Districts, Commercial Pest Applicators, Cities, Counties, Public Utility Districts, Public Health Districts, Municipalities, State and Local agencies, and any other commercial, private, public, or government entity providing mosquito control. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Means the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or, where appropriate, the term may also be used as a designation for a duly authorized official of said agency. Experimental Use Permit: Federal and state permits that allow the use of unregistered pesticides in the context of research and development for registration of the pesticide under FIFRA Section 3, or in the context of research and development for registration of a new use of a currently registered pesticide under FIFRA Section 3. See 40 CFR 172, 15.58.405 RCW, and WAC 16-228-1460. FIFRA: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act FWPCA: Means the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), as now or as it may be amended. General Permit: means a permit which covers multiple discharges of a point source category within a designated geographical rate, in lieu of individual permits being issued to each discharger. Ground Water: means any naturally occurring water in a saturated zone of stratum beneath the surface of land or a surface water body. Incidental: The minimum amount of adulticide deposition possible to surface waters of the state during properly conducted pesticide applications (in accordance with this permit and the FIFRA label) for controlling vector mosquitoes. Individual Permit: means a discharge permit specific to s single point source or facility. Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP): An ecologically based strategy for pest control that incorporates monitoring, biological, physical, and chemical controlS in order to manage pests with the least possible hazard to people, then environment and property. IPMP considers all available control actions, including no action. Pesticide use is only one control action. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3,2010 Page 40 Larvicide: A pesticide product designed to target mosquitoes in larva and pupa life stages and applied directly to water. Meningitis: Inflammation of the membranes covering the brain and spinal cord. Meningoencephalitis: Inflammation of the brain and membrane surrounding it. Mosquito Control District (MCD): A district organized under the authority of chapter 17.28 RCW for the control of mosquitoes in Washington State. Mosquito Control Entity: See 'Entity.' Natural Pyrethrin: Chemicals isolated from the chrysanthemum flower that have insecticidal properties. New Applicant: An entity or mosquito control entity that proposes to begin discharge of pesticides to control mosquitoes and that does not yet have permit coverage but is beginning the permitting process by submitting a complete application to Ecology. New Permittee: Permittees who begin mosquito control activities using pesticides after the effective date of this permit. This does not include Permittees who were covered under Washington State Department of Health' s blanket NPDES permit coverage unless they fail to transfer permit coverage (section S1.D) within 60 days of the effective date of this permit. NPDES: means the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System under section 402 of FWPCA. NuisaQce Mosquito Control: The use ofIPM, larvicides and adulticides to control mosquitoes that are an annoyance to humans and animals but are not known, in Washington State, to carry disease that may be transmitted to humans. Open Accessible Areas: Areas that are easily accessible by the public (e.g. wetlands, ponds, lakes, etc.) Planned Treatments: A schedule of treatment dates developed by the mosquito control entity at the beginning of the treatment season. Permit: Means an authorization, license, or equivalent control document issued by Ecology to implements chapter 173-200, 173-216 and or 173-226 WAC. Permittee: Entities that apply for and gain coverage under this permit and have control of or cause the discharge permitted under coverage of this permit. Pesticide: A chemical formulation that has insecticidal properties and is used to control mosquitoes. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 41 " Pesticide Applicator(s): An individual with the appropriate Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) licensees) to apply aquatic (larvicides) and aerial/ground (adulticides) pesticides. Pesticide Resistance: The build-up of a tolerance to a pesticide by the target insect through survival of individuals who are not impacted by enough pesticide to cause mortality or through genetic variance have natural tolerance. When an insect is pesticide resistant to a specific formula, that formula will have reduced efficacy or sometimes no effect at all. Poliomyelitis: Inflammation of the spinal cord. Pollutant: Means any substance discharged that would alter the chemical, physical, thermal, biological, or radiological integrity of the waters of the state of would be likely to create a nuisance or renders such waters harmful, detrimental or injurious to the public health, safety, or welfare, or to any legitimate beneficial use, or to any animal life, either terrestrial or aquatic. Pollutants include, but are not limited to, the following: dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, filter backwash, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge, munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt, pH, temperature, TSS, turbidity, color, BOD5, TDS, toxicity, odor, and industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste. Product Formulation(s): The active, inert, and other ingredients specific to a brand name pesticide (e.g. Altosid, Permanone, or Trumpet EC). Pyrethroid: A synthetic chemical insecticide formulated to mimic the action ofthe natural pyrethrins. Qualified toxicologist: A person with a PhD in toxicology or in a health or ecological science with an emphasis in toxicology, or a person with a Master's degree in toxicology or a related science with an emphasis in toxicology, who is working in the field of toxicology. Range: A specific series of dates that anticipates the months of planned treatment. This is a planned range-it can be exceeded if public health concerns arise. Representative sampling: In a large treatment area, the sites selected within that area that provide statistical significance (as determined by a statistician). Residue: Any excess pesticide applied during an application and any excess pesticide, all ch~micals, and their degredants left behind after a pesticide has completed its purpose. Secure Access Washington (SAW): The web based application where persons may apply for permit coverage and Permittee's may update information and submit annual reports. SAW is located at https:llsecureaccess.wa.gov. Synergist: An additive or other active ingredient that increases the effectiveness of the main active ingredient in a pesticide formulation. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 42 Surface Water(s): means all waters defined as "waters of the United States" in 40 CFR 122.2 within the geographic boundaries of the state of Washington. This include lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, salt waters and all other surface waters and watercourses within the jurisdiction of the state of Washington. Also includes drainages to surface waters. Surveillance: The act of setting traps to monitor for the presence of mosquitoes and to trap wild mosquitoes for mosquito-borne disease testing. Ultra Low Volume (UL V): A type of pesticide application that uses very small amounts of pesticide per acre (approximately 1 fluid ounce per acre depending on FIFRA label requirements). This type of application creates an invisible fog with particles approximately 30 microns in size that drifts to impact adult mosquitoes. Upland farm pond: Private farm ponds created from upland sites that did not incorporate natural water bodies (WAC 173-201A-260(3)(f). Vector Mosquito Control: The use ofIPM, larvicides and adulticides to control mosquitoes that are known carriers, in Washington, of disease that may be transmitted to humans. The current list of endemic diseases in Washington includes West Nile virus, Western Equine Encephalitis, and St. Louis Encephalitis. Washington Pesticide Control Act: Chapter 15.58 Revised Code Washington (RCW) Water Supply, Conveyance, Drainage, or Other Restricted Access Systems: Restricted access areas that are accessible only through manholes or other means. Not readily accessible to the public (e.g. water, electrical or transportation vaults, storm drains, catch basins, etc.) Waters of The State: All surface and ground waters in Washington State as defined by chapter 90.48.020 RCW, 173-201A-020 WAC and 173-226-030 WAC including any future amendments of state law. Also includes drainages to waters of the state. Water-use Restriction: This refers to any product labeled for restricted water use immediately after treatment (currently applies only to malathion, temephos, and paraffinic white mineral oil). West Nile Virus (WNV): An arboviral disease of the genus Flaviviridae. It is transmitted by mosquitoes and can have three outcomes: no symptoms, West Nile fever, and WNV neuroinvasive disease. West Nile Fever: A form of WNV that has symptoms similar to that of seasonal influenza. WNV Neuroinvasive Disease: A form ofWNV that affects the central nervous system and may take the form of meningitis, encephalitis, meningoencephalitis, or poliomyelitis. Can be fatal. In the absence of other definitions set forth herein, the definition as set forth in 40 CFR Part 403.3 or in chapter 90.48 RCW shall be used for circumstances concerning discharges. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3,2010 Page 43 .'. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books 1. Ebbing, Darrell D. and Gammon, Steven D., General Chemistry i h Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA, 2002. 2. Gamer, Bryan A.; Editor, "A Handbook of Basic Law Terms," West Group, St. Paul Minnesota, 1999. 3. Harris, Daniel C., Quantitative Chemical Analysis 6th Edition, W. H. Freeman and Company, New York, NY, 2003. 4. Lide, David R. Ph.D. Editor-in-Chief, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 83rd Edition, CRC Press, New York, NY, 2002. 5. Little, V.A., General and Applied Entomology, Third Edition, Harper & Row, New York, New York, 1972: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Publications 6. Gubler, Duane J.,Sc.D et aI., "Epidemic/Epizootic West Nile Virus in the United States: Guidelines for Surveillance, Prevention, and Control," Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Publication, Revision 3, 2003. 7. Hollingsworth, Doneen B. Chair, "Before The Swarm: Guidelines for the Emergency Management of Mosquito-Borne Disease Outbreaks," The Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, last accessed November 24, 2009, http://www.cdc.gov/ncidodldvbidlwestnile/astho/wnv astho .html 8. Moore, e.G. et aI., "Guidelines for Arbovirus Surveillance Programs in the United States," Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Publication, April 1993 9. National Center For Infection Diseases, CDC, "Infectious Disease Information," last accessed December 2009. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidodldiseases/listmosguitobome.htm 10. Division of Vector-Borne Infectious Diseases, CDC, "West Nile Virus," last accessed December 2009. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidodldvbidlwestnile/galsymptoms.htm 11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "Seasonal Influenza (flu)," last accessed December 2009. http://www.cdc.govlflulaboutldisease/ 12.' Division of Vector-Borne Infectious Diseases, CDC, "West Nile Virus Statisitcs, Surveillance, and Control," last accessed December 2009. http://www.cdc·.gov/ncidod/dvbidlwestnile/surv&control.htm#surveillance Court Cases Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 44 ~" . . 13. Headwaters et aI., v. Talent Irrigation District. U.S. Ct. of Appeals for the Ninth Cir. Ct. Case No. 99-35373, D.C. No.CV-98-06004-ALA. March 12,2001. Cases not available online at www.ca9.uscourts.gov before 2005 14. Fairhurst v. Hagener, Director, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks. U.S. Ct. of Appeals for the NinthCir. Ct. Case No. 04-35366, D.C. No.CV-03-00067-SEH OPINION. September 8, 2005.http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2005/09/07/0435366.pdf 15. League of Wilderness Defenders et aI., v. Harv Forsgren, Regional Forester, Pacific Northwest Region United States Forest Service. U.S. Ct. of Appeals for the Ninth Cir. Ct. Case No. 01-35729, D.C No.CV-00-01383-RE OPINION. November 4,2002. Cases not available online at www.ca9.uscourts.gov before 2005 16. The National Cotton Council of America et aI., v. United States Environmental Protection Agency. U. S. Ct. of Appeals for the Sixth Cir. Ct. Case Nos. 06-4630;07- 3180/318113182/3183/3184/3185/3186/3187/319113236. January 7, 2009. http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/09a0004p-06.pdf 17. State Department of Ecology v Northwest Aquatic Ecosystems, et al., Thurston County Superior Court, Washington, Case No. 07-2-01447-8, November 26,2008. http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/pesticides/permit documentsl1126080rder.pdf Department of Ecology Publications 18. Marshall, Randall, "Laboratory Guidance and Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Review Criteria," Water Quality Program, Dept. of Ecology, Publication No. WQ-R-95-80, Revised December .2008. 19. Frank, Ashlea Rives et ai, "The Potential Effects on Endangered Species from the Use of Four Insecticides. and a Synergist for Adult Mosquito Control in Washington State," Compliance Services International study sponsored by Washington State Department of Ecology, CSI Study No. 08709, Ecology RFP 0819 WQ, April 2008, p. 1-34. 20. Anderson, Paul D. and Dugger, Dan, "Surface Water Monitoring Programfor Pesticides in Salmonid-Bearing Streams, 2007 Data Summary, A cooperative Study by Washington State Departments of Ecology and Agriculture," Dept. of Ecology, Publication No. 08-03-009, April 2008. Department of Health Publications 21. Washington State Department of Health, "Annex 2, West Nile Virus Outbreak Response Plan, to Appendix 10, Zoonotics Response Basic Plan," DOH Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan Basic Plan, February 2009, p. 1-49. 22. DOH info: http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/ts/Zoo/WNV/mosgdistribution.pdf Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 45 Federal Publications 23.33 USC 1251 et seq.: Federal Water Pollution Control Act 24. Environmental Protection Agency; "Application of Pesticides to Waters of the United States in Compliance With FIFRA," Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 227, November 27,2006, p. 68483-68492. http://www.epa.gov/npdes/regulations/pest final rule.pdf 25. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) http://www.epa.gov/oecaerthicivil/fifraififraenfstatreq.html 26. Lecky, James H,Director, Office of Protected Resources et aI., "National Marine Fisheries Service Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation, Biological Opinion, Environmental Protection Agency Registration of Pesticides Containing Chlorpyrifos, Diazinon, and Malathion," National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Publication, November 18, 2008. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/consultation/pesticides.htm 27. Piperonyl Butoxide Environmental Risk Assessment. Eckel, William P. et al.; EPA-HQ- OPP-2005-0042-0037, December 2004, Revised September 2005. 28. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for d-phenothrin. Bradbury, Steven, Ph.D., EPA- HQ-OPP-2008-0140, September 2008. 29. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Naled. Rossi, Lois A., EPA 738-R-02-008, January 2002. 30. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Permethrin. Keigwin, Jr. Richard P., EPA 738- R-09-306, Revised-May 2009. 31. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Piperonyl Butoxide (PBO). Edwards, Debra, Ph.D., EPA 738-R-06-005, June 2006. 32. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Pyrethrins. Edwards, Debra, Ph.D., EPA 738- R-06-004, June 2006. 33. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Resmethrin. Edwards, Debra, Ph.D.; EPA 738- R-06-003, June 2006. 34. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Malathion. Keigwin Jr., Richard P. et aI., EPA 738-R-06-030, Revised May 2009. 35. Science Policy Council Handbook: Risk Characterization. Fowle 3rd, John R. Ph.D. et aI., EPA 100-B-00-002, December 2000. All Reregistration Eligibility Decisions (REDs) complete by EPA are available at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/status.htm Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 46 Journal Articles 36. Antwi, Frank B. and Peterson, Robert KD, "Toxicity of <>-phenothrin and resmethrin to non- target insects," Pesticide Management Science, Vol. 65, No.3, March 2009, p. 300-305. 37. Carney, Ryan M. et aI., "Efficacy of Aerial Spraying of Mosquito Adulticide in Reducing Incidence of West Nile Virus, California, 2005," Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 14, No. 5, May 2008, p.747. 38. Davis, Ryan S. et aI., "An Ecological Risk Assessment for Insecticides Used in Adult Mosquito Management," Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, Vol. 3, No.3, 2007, p. 373-382. 39. Dwyer, F. J. et aI., "Assessing Contaminant Sensitivity if Endangered and Threatened Species: Part III. Effluent Toxicity Tests," Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, Vol. 48, 2005, p. 174-183. 40. Helson, B.V. et aI., "Laboratory toxicology of six forestry insecticides to four species of bee," Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, Vo1.27, No.1, 1994, p. 107-114. 41. Laetz, Cathy A. et aI., "The Synergistic Toxicity of Pesticide Mixtures: Implications for Risk Assessment and the Conservation of Endangered Pacific Salmon," Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 117, No.3, March 2009, p. 348. 42. Moffitt, John E., MD and Portnoy, Jay M., MD et aI., Chief Editors, "Stinging Insect Hypersensitivity: A Practice Primer," Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Vol. 1 04, No.5, May 1999, p. 963-980. http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(99)70450- IIfulltext 43. Moffitt, John E. MD, Chief Editor, "Stinging insect hypersensitivity: A Practice Parameter Update," Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Vol. 114, No.4, October 2004 http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-67 49(04 )02165-7 /abstract 44. Peterson, Robers K.D. et al.; "A Human-Health Risk Assessment for West Nile Virus and Insecticides Used in Mosquito Management," Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 114, No.3, March 2006, p. 366-372. 45. Pierce, R.H. et aI., "Aerial and Tidal Transport of Mosquito Control Pesticides into the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary," Revista de Biologfa Tropical (Int. J. Trop. BioI. ISSN-0034-7744), Vol. 53 (Suppl. 1), May 2005, p. 117-125. 46. Reddy, Michael R. et aI., "Efficacy of Resmethrin Aerosols Applied from the Road for Suppressing Culex Vectors of West Nile Virus," Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases, Vol. 6, No.2, 2006, p. 117-127. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 47 47. Schleier 3rd, Jerome J. et aI., "A two-dimensional probabilistic acute human-health risk assessment of insecticide exposure after adult mosquito management," Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, Vol. 23, No.5, July 2009, p. 555-563. 48. ---Schleier 3rd, Jerome J. et aI., "Environmental Concentrations, Fate, and Risk Assessment of Pyreihrins and Piperonyl Butoxide After Aerial U1tralow-Volume Applications for Adult Mosquito Management," Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 27, No.5, 2007, p. 1063-1068. 49. ---Schleier 3rd, Jerome J. et aI., "Equine Risk Assessment for Insecticides Used in Adult Mosquito Management," Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, Vol. 14, No.2, 2008, p. 392-407. 50. ---Schleier 3rd, JeromeJ. and Peterson, Robert K. D., "Deposition and Air Concentrations of Permethrin and Naled Used for Adult Mosquito Management," Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, published online June 18, 2009, http://www.springerlink.com/contentlI112135726156830/. last accessed Nov 25, 2009. 51. Weston, Donald P. et aI., "Aquatic Effects of Aerial Spraying for Mosquito Control over an Urban Area," Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 40, No. 18,2006, p. 5817-5822. 52. Wilson, Samantha D. MHSc. et aI., "West Nile Virus: The Buzz on Ottawa Residents' Awareness, Attitudes and Practices," Canadian Journal of Public Health, Vol. , No. , 2005, p. 109-113. 53. The Working Group on Synergy in Complex Mixtures with The Harvard School of Public Health, "Synergy: Positive Interaction Among Chemicals in Mixtures," The Journal of Pesticide Reform, Summer 2009, p. 11-14. Miscellaneous Resou'rces 54. American Mosquito Control Association, "Mosquito Information" http://mosguito.org/mosguito-informationiindex.aspx, last accessed December 23, 2009. 55. Antonelli, Art et aI., Pest Management for Prevention and Control of Mosquitoes with Special Attention to West Nile Virus," WSU Extension Puyallup, Pub. No.PLS-121, Revised April 2007. 56. Suffolk County New York Environmental Risk Assessment Online Resources (Databases) 57. National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC): http://npic.orst.edu/ 58. National Institutes of Health Environmental Health and Toxicology: http://sis.nlm.nih.gov/enviro.html 59. The Extension Toxicology Network (Extoxnet): http://extoxnet.orst.edul 60. US EPA OPP Pesticide Fate Database: http://cfuub.epa.gov/pfate/home.cfm Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 48 61. Compendium of PestiCide Common Names (link from EPA: http://cfpub.epa.gov/pfate/Chem _ details.cfm): http://www.alanwood.net/pesticides/index cn frame. htm I Revised Code Washington (RCW) 62. Chapter 15.58 RCW: Washington pesticide control act 63. Chapter 17.28 RCW: Mosquito control districts 64. Chapter 43.21C RCW: State environmental policy 65. Chapter 90.48 RCW: Water pollution control Technical Resources (Labels and MSDS) 66. Abate: http://www.c1arke.comlindex.php?option=com content&view=category&layout=blog&id=7 8&Itemid= 156#anvil 67. Anvil 10+10 http://www.clarke.comlindex.php?option=com content&view=category&layout=blog&id=7 8&Itemid= I 56#anvil 68. Di-Brom: http://www.amvac-chemical.com/dibromcon labels.html 69. Permanone: http://www.bayerprocentral.com/bayer/cropscience/backedbybayer .nsflid/EN Vector Labels MSDS 70. Pyrocide: http://www.mgk.comlProfessional-Pest- ControllF ogging%20ConcentrateslPyrocide-l OO.aspx 71. Scourge: http://www.bayerprocentral.com/bayer/cropscience/backedbybayer.nsf/id/EN Vector Labels MSDS 72. Trumpet: http://www.myadapco.comlproduct adulticides.jsp 73. Permethrin Technical MSDS: http://www.agrisel.com/permethrin.html 74. Permethrin Technical MSDS: http://msds.chem.ox.ac.ukIPE/permethrin.html Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 75. Chapter 173-201A WAC: Surface water quality standards for Washington State 76. Chapter 173-204 WAC: Sediment Management Standards Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 49 " 77. Chapter 173-205 WAC: Whole etlluent toxicity testing and limits 78. Chapter 173-226 WAC: Waste discharge general permit program 79. Chapter 197-11 WAC: State environmental policy act (SEPA) Rules Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 50 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT INFORMATION In order to be considered, all comments about the proposed permit must be received by5 pm on March 10,2010 (35 days from the date of public notice) Ecology has tentatively determined to reissue the Mosquito Control General Permit to mosquito control activities as identified in Special Condition S 1., Permit Coverage. The proposed permit , will revoke and replace the current permit. Ecology will publish a Public Notice of Draft (PNOD) on February 3,2010 in the Washington State Register. The PNOD informs the public that the draft permit and fact sheet are available for review and comment. The notice will also be mailed to those who currently have coverage under the Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit and those identified as interested parties, including the Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Advisory Group. Copies of the draft general permit, fact sheet, and related documents are available for inspection and copying between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5 :00 p.m. weekdays, by appointment, at the Ecology offices listed below or may be obtained from Ecology's website or by contacting Ecology by mail, phone, fax or email. Permit Website: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/pesticides/finalyesticideyermits/mosquito/mosq uito index.html Ecology Headquarters Building Address: 300 Desmond Drive Lacey, W A 98503 Contact Ecology: Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Attn: Aquatic Pesticide Permit Manager PO Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Submitting Written and Oral Comments .Jon Jennings Email: jonathan.jennings@ecy.wa.gov Phone: (360) 407-6283 Fax: (360) 407-6426 Ecology will accept written and oral comments on the draft Mosquito General Permit, fact sheet, and application. Comments should reference specific text when possible. Comments may address the following: • technical issues, • accuracy and completeness of information, • the scope of facilities proposed for coverage, • adequacy of environmental protection and permit conditions, or • any other concern that would result from issuance of the revised permit. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 51 Ecology prefers comments be submitted by email to: jonathan.jennings@ecy.wa.gov. Written comments must be postmarked or received via email no later than 5pm, March 10,2010. Submit written, hard copy comments to: Jon Jennings Department of Ecology PO Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 You may also provide oral comments by testifying at the public hearing. Public Hearing and Workshops The public hearing and workshop on the draft general permit will be held at the location below. The purpose of the hearing is to provide an opportunity for people to give formal oral testimony and comments on the draft permit. The purpose of the workshops is to explain the proposed changes to the new permit. Hearing and Workshop Issuing the Final Permit March 9, 2010 (starts at lpm) Moses Lake Fire Department 701 E. Third Ave. Moses Lake, WA 98837 The final permit will be issued after Ecology receives and considers all public comments. Ecology expects to issue the new general permit in May 2010. It will be effective June 2010. Further information may be obtained by contacting Permit Writer Jon Jennings, at Ecology, by phone at (360) 407-6283, by emailatjonathan.jennings@ecy.wa.gov, or by writing to Ecology's Olympia address listed above. Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 52 ." APPENDIX B: LIST OF TECHNICAL CALCULATIONS Technical Calculation: Reasonable Potential Determination 1-22-201O.xlsx Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3,2010 Page 53 /"..-, APPENDIX C: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS To add after public comment period Draft Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit Fact Sheet -February 3, 2010 Page 54 ~~ . PLANNING DIVISION a WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIR~ENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS This requirement may be waived by: M~u/ro A8A-~ 1. Property Services 2. Public Works Plan Review 3. Building 4. Planning PROJECT NAME: . 0<.0/0 DATE: ~Zi7 /C;ZO/O 7 / H:ICEDIDataIForms-T emplateslSelf-Help HandoutslPlanninglwaiverofsubmittalreqs.xls 06/09 • PLANNING DIVISION 4 WAIVEr<OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND 3 Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3 Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND 3 Map of View Area 2 AND 3 Photosimulations 2 AND 3 This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services 2. Public Works Plan Review 3. Building 4. Planning H:\CED\Dala\Forms-Templales\Self-Help Handouls\Planning\waiverofsubmitlalreqs.xls 06/09 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING / BUILDING / PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM Date: June 17, 2005 To: City Clerk's Office From: Stacy M. Tucker Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. Project Name: Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 LUA (file) Number: LUA-05-022, ECF Cross-References: AKA's: Project Manager: Susan Fiala Acceptance Date: March 8, 2005 Applicant: City of Renton Owner: City of Renton Contact: Allen Quynn -City of Renton PID Number: None ERC Decision Date: March 29, 2005 ERC Appeal Date: April 19, 2005 Administrative Approval: Appeal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental review to continue a Mosquito Abatement ?rogram fur another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland. from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic Insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted In upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and In accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application reqUirements. The treatments may be conducted In earlier or later months If mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where authorization has been received. Location: Panther Creek Wetland Area Comments: S. Gollier 2709 Talbot Road 5 Renton, WA 98055 (party of record) Updated: 04/01/05 .~ PARTIES OF RECORD MOSQUITO ABATEMENT 2005+ LUA05-022, ECF Cynthia Pickreign 2413 Talbot Crest D'rive 5 Renton, WA 98055 tel: 425-271-4668 (party of record) Allen Quynn City of Renton 1055 5 Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 tel: 425-430-7247 eml: aquynn@ci.renton.wa.us (owner / applicant / contact) (Page 1 of 1) CITY 4tF, RENTON, ...u. Kathy, Keolker~Wheeler, Mayor PlanninglBuildinglPublic Works Department Gregg Zimmer~aD P.E., Administrator ',April 21, 2005 Allen Quynn City of Renton ' 1055S Grady Way' 'Rentqn,WA 98055 SUBJECT: Mosquito Abatement Program (2005·2009) LUA05-022, ',ECF Dear Mr. Quynn: , " This letter is to inform you<that the 'appeal. p~riodhas ended forthe Environmental Review Committee's (ERC)' Determination. of Non-Significance -Mitigated for the above~referenced ,project., " ' . No appeals were filed on the ERG determination .. . ) , . , This' decision is final and application for the , appropriately 'required permits, may ,proceed. The applicant must' comply with all'ERG :Mitigation Measureslisied in the' ERC Rep'ort dated March ,2~, 2005. ' .' , '" If you have a~y questions, -please feel free to contact me, at (425) 430·7382. . . ..' . .',. ··:Z~3~mirtee .... Susan Fiala , Senior Planner . . " cc: CynthiaPickreign,S. Gollier I Parties of Record ----'----}-OS-S-s-ou-t-h-G-ra-dy-W-ay-.-R-e-nt-o-n,-W-a-sh-in-g-to-n-9-8-0S-S------~. '* This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDA VIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE lody Barton, being first duly sworn on oath that she is a Legal Advertising Representative of the King County Journal a daily newspaper; which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general. circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Public Notice was published on April 5, 2005. of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum Jody BartoW , Legal Adve'tttsing Representative, King County Journal . Subscribed aDd sworn to me this 5th day of April, 2005. \\\\1111111111//111 ~",\ fl.. ME',.q. II/,z ~ ~ ••••••••••• G.t.. '/~ .:::; 0 .' slon '. '7~ '~ Tom A. Meagher .::: A.:. ~.' (I'\S ~.j-". 'A-. ~ ....... "t$' ~ .• r ~ Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Redmon@; W~~~Ry\\ ~ P.O. Number: == : _.~ ! = Cost of publishing this notice includes an affidavit surcharge. % ~ \. ,oUBL\(J .l ~ ¥ ~ 7,.;..' •• ", :1 ..., .... 0 ~ ~ ~ ". ~ y 2 ZOO •• ' 0 ~ ~ O······:······\~ ~ ~//II f: WASI(\ \\,,~ II/ It I" 1\ \I \ \ \ \\\ NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMI'ITEE RENTON,WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Commit- tee has issued a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated for the fol- lowing project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. Mosquito Abatement Program (2005-2009) LUA05-022, ECF Location: Panther Creek Wetland Area. The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review in order to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another five (5) year period, April 2005 through September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack- mounted, portable blower. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on April 19, 2005. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady· Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional infor- mation regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Published·in the King County Journal April 5,2005.#858738 , ·.C OF:.'RENT0N ';:" ;CURRENt'pu~NNING':DlvISI()N ,;, ,'". ':'~Ff~~~VI!':.OF SE~VICE BYJ\n~ILIN~" . On the 1 day of April, 2005, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated & Signature Sheet documents. This information was sent to: Agencies See Attached S Gollier Party of Record Cynthia Pickreign Party of Record (Signature of Sender): UJb G,oM,d\ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Holly Graber 'signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: '5/~% ----'----- Notary (Print): My appointment expires: template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology • Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region • \ Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers • Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Jamey Taylor • Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 900 OakesdaJe Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) \ WDFW -Stewart Reinbold • Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. • c/o Department of Ecology Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 3190 160th Ave SE 39015 -172"d Avenue SE Bellevue WA 98008 Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office • Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program • 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172"d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 \ KC Wastewater Treatment Division • Office of Archaeology & Historic Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation· Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, WA 98504~8343 ) City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr .. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director 13020 SE 72"d Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA'98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. * . Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. template -affidavit of service by mailing ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Moaqurto Abatement Program (2005 ~ 2009) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA~2, ECF LOCATION: AdJacent to and upland 01 the eastern octge of the Panther Creek Wetland. generally located between SR-167 on the we8t and Lake Avenue SouthITalbot Road South on the eat' and extending from SW 43rd Street on the south to 1-405 on the north. OESCRIPnON: The applicant f. reque.tlng Environmental (SEPA) Review In order to continua II Mosquito Abatemant Program for another nva (5) -year period, April 2005 through September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adJacant to and upland tram the Panther Creek Wetland. It will cona',t only of land treatment application. 0' an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic Inlectlctda spray to brush and other upland vegetation ullng I!I gasoline-powered, backpeck-mounted, portable blower. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals 01 the envlronmentel detennlnatlon must be 1I1od In writing an or before 5:00 PM on April 19, 2005. Appeals mUlt be flied In writing together with the required $75.00 application toe with: Haarlng Examiner, City of Rento", 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeala to the Examiner ere governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.8. Addltlonel In'amallon regarding the appeel proce •• may be obtained trom the Renton City Clerk', Office, (425) 430-651 O. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. . .----r~OL~~~ e FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Plea8elnclud~,the.prolf!.~HlUMBER wherfcalling for.properflle Identification. CERTIFICATION I ---""" I, SJ-aCM. 7tA..C/a¥ . , hereby certify that 0 copies of ~he above d0Sl"~e~:.~~_~\\" were poMd b)lIIlCiJ; ~ conspicuous places or nearby the descnbed propeI}1~.·~\ON ~-t __ ~~lf, ,-Q?'::"; ~.\.:p' J~.\(·t r::-: ~OTARY ~\ 1'1 DATE: -(flOu SIGNED: .-Cfl: I • I PUBL\C :' ~ 'd" h S t"_ .:o~:t ATTEST: Subscrib~d and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in ail l~~ tate ~ 19*~>' &-.:F 5eCiIfie Wfr, on the 2-day of ~ ..Ax) L . ----=:~~~;;:_;;~~~?:+rnR~ ... ·· ~~ ..,:-:'-o \ . W/$ _-\'\-,-.".~ ..... , ......... - ! ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: LOCATION: Mosquito Abatement Program (2005 -2009) LUA05-022, ECF . AdJacent to and upland of the eastern edge of the Panther Creek Wetlands generally . located between SR-167 on the west and Lake Avenue SouthiTalbot Road South on the east and extending from SW 43rd Street on the south to 1-405 on the north. DESCRIPTION: The applicant Is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review In order to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another five (5) -year period, April 2005 through September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adJacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland .. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic Insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be flied In writing on or before 5:00 PM on April 19, 2005. Appeals must be flied In writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional Information regarding the. appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION b~fe . Kathy Keolker-Wheeler. Mayor April 1, 2005 Allen Quynn City of Renton. . 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 '~- SUBJECT: Mosquito Abatement Program (2005-2009) LUA05~022, ECF . Dear Mr, Quynn: . '-' .' . CITY.F RENTON Planning/BuildinglPublicWorks Department Gregg Zinimerman P.E., Administrator . This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to advise you that they have completed their review cif the subject proje"ct. T~eERC issued a threshdld Deterr:)1ination of '. Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the enclosed Mitigation Measures . document. . . . . . .. ... Appeals of the environmental determination must be flied In writing· on or before 5:00 PM.on April' 19,2005. Appeals must be fileq·in.writjngtogetherwith the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner', City of Renton,t05S South,Grady, VVaYi·Rent()n,WA 98055.·Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of-Renton Municipal Code' Section 4-8~1:10.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process mayl;le obtained ·from the ;RentO~:Gity Cler.k's· Office, ( 425) 430"6510. . '. . . . .... .' .' . ", -.'. ',,' . If the Environmental Determination is appealed,a·'pUblic h~aring date will be set and all parties notified. The preceding, information willas.sist :you in planning for implementation of your project and enable you to exercise your appeal rights more fully'if you ch()ose to do so. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above,. plea~e call me at( 425)~30-7382. . For the Environmental Review Committee,' . ',' •... C\~~ . . ~ Susan Fiala . . SeniorPlariner cc: S. Gollier, Cynthia Pickreign I Parties of Record Enclosure ~ ---:------:1"='O-=-55~S=-o-u-:-th-:G=-r-ad:-y-:-W,=-a-y---=R-en-t-on-,-:-w,-a-:'sh-=-in-g-to-ri-9--g-0-55-------R E N TON * This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE y " ~ r . ' ',- 'J' . ~ .' , . , ~ .. ,'" ' .. ~,,-"'" / ',,'.-,' '.-" '\~ " ' .. . :,1 .... ~ .. ' f :., .' , ~. ': ... ". 'r' '. '-, :. , """, ','. _ . .: .... ..... ~ .. ' )", :, , ,'.~ .. , .' ..... ~ " ~' .. , ,,' r, '., .... :; ;-:" . . ' . -' ,;. '. " ,;.' " , '. ' J;' ~'"l' :,; , : ,:,' ,. : ," .... ) " : '.: ~ . , . ~~. ~ ·-.r .'.: " .J'.~' , "',, ... ' .. ., ..... ' .. ". -.... .. ,',: ...• ' , , . , .... : ........ r.,' : ;: :~ ,.)4 . ,l. ""/':' " " '" ." 'i'. .. .,:- ,," .~, : . ~ .. f"'" '.,'" , , ."~. ~' ~ '" . " .:, :..: '.' :'!.J:" ~ •• : .-• 'i ~ ,', -,' .. ' !, ',-" " ~. --. " j" ,.," .'~ . '1 - :;' ,~<: ~;." /' , ~. "., .... "~y > . " ",,;, -,.' ~. " , ~-', .. ...... { '.'1." ,:' ",>. , '.' ~ -,'. ,r, . ," '. ,.>. '. ~ .:; . . :.' . . ' .. ~ " ~ t.', , " -'., ..,', ~' . ' , " ". '" " , ,.,:_-1 : .... : 0' :._ J . " ~',' .~ i· ", '-'I ._. -.: "- .' .... ."~ .. , ,,' "'. ,,' "", " , ~,:?~' ".: '. '" ,'~~ .', .... : ",:.t.. . ... I., ... :,' . ',' " .-:-: ';( , ,; :",,1 : .. • ~,~t' , .:' ~ ,-:' " , " , ..... ,'~ ." '-.. ." !,' . ~ :'. , " .~ ., . " .'" :""'l, , 'J.-_.?,/'t", , . ~ . , ',.,' ...... ~ , ~: " , 1;'· ' .. ~ :'.~ . " : ~.' ..... - " ~:-'''' . . . \~. " , ' .. -,:;.- > . ..,;., , , " ', .. '. ". "~ , ,~ .. :.., "! • .-~ ~ j.. .'-~;; '. ; ~'. ~ " -. .. :, " "~., " .:, . J ••••• ". :'" ,-~ '-. 'J'-' \",' J.- c, i.< , ' , .~., . -" of ... .... , , • ~ . I: • ;.\\ '. ;.' , j • ~ I ",1" " ,. " . ::. ~,- .. ', , '" .. : ~ , ' .,.'. '..;." ; .. " .'1' ' ..... , ~ . '! ':" ~ • " ~:": .:",,,.::". .', . , . \ "'.' ''';'.' . ~: .' ~; . -:"-'-.' -'. " ,.:, . " \ " .. ~, ; '. ',J ',' .... . . ~:. ,i' ••• . :,<' ,': , : '" '~'. "J .,,' -"",,' ,. . ,:;, ' , , , " 1."" ~ ":', ' 'f' '. ~ " . 'r' ," '" ' .... " .. ~ .'.' .":.. , .... ",: . .i. ." ...... ".:., .. ~'. '.J', .. ' ',./. ".' ,.' . " ~'.' '.' -": ( , ." " '''.' . ,,-,,;' .... .... :. .' -..... . ';'., " ' ,'" '.',' '.: ' " ':~.' ,> ,r', ,'j: t, " .'; • ~ ,' ..... j, ... '.4' " <, :"'" ,. _, .;, .: ,,: '.:'': .... ~' ~, " . '.,"'. ,,', , ~~. , , . ,! , ' ~, ,~ .. ;'''':. ~;, " I :,' to· ,~ .' , . '.' :,,' . . ,:""''';''-':,'.: ....... " .. { ",:. :.' .... {.>:\.::~': , ... ~ __ ;I:·· ... · ~: .. , ' t- ~:~?:?'~;Y:!f:,,: "r':J , :,< }h ::' . ',~.-~ ".' ", ,,' , . . ~ ")'. " .... !, ' .. . ,,,1 ..... ! .', 1"< ~ ',': . ':' ,,~, to,' ~ ~ , :.' ...... , ': ",', I '" , ~' " .' " "," ~ , ~ '( t ,: .. '" ,,~ ,,' ~ ,. ' ." "' .. : . :" . ,', ' .,' . ~".-~ '.', ,1 \ " ,~'I, ,', , ~', . . ,:<",' ..... ~ .. :", ,'~ I .\ .~ , ,'.~ .' .~ " , ~ '. . , .,' 1,',,' .. :, '. " r. , " ',,,<,' . " .,' . " . .. . ~. , .' ,~y ",",,:-:: : " . . -',,' .. " " . . , ',' I,', ,". ' I ':. " ~ >';: . ~ ,', \~, .. . \ , . . ' . " .' , '.~. L. , . .~', J' :?,~~ ..... ',' .< . -.. . ' . . " .:"1 , 't" \ ...• , :.~ .. ' . .,' .. . '.; .'~ , '" ',f :-'/" ,j",,' CITY OF RENTON ·DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-022, ECF APPLICANT: City of Renton -Surface Water Utility PROJECT NAME: Mosquito Abatement Program (2005-2009) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review in order to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another five (5) -year period, April 2005 through September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: Adjacent to and upland of the eastern edge of the Panther Creek Wetlands generally located between SR-167 on the west and Lake Avenue SouthfTalbot Road South on the east and extending from SW 43rd Street on the south to 1-405 on the north. The City of Renton Departmentof Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmehtal Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. '~1 Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed In writing on or before 5:00 PM on April 1~; )2005. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, - 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: April;5,2005 March 29, 2005 DA' 7 3} ~J los- Agenda listed below. THE FOLLOWING IS A CONSENT AGENDA Park Terrace Annexation (Erickson) LUA05-020, ECF The applicant has requested Environmental Review for the proposed rezoning of this 7.65-acre annexation site (excluding streets) from King County's R-4 Zone to Renton's R-8 Zone. Mosquito Abatement Program (2005-2009) (Fiala) LUA05-022, ECF The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review in order to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another five (5) -year period, April 2005 through September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic Insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. cc: K. Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer A. Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator ® B. Wolters, EDNSP Director ® J. Gray, Fire Prevention .-- N. Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director ® F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner _ .---- S. Engler, Fire Prevention ® -_/ J. Medzegian, Council S. Meyer, P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director R. Lind, Economic Development L. Warren, City Attorney ® STAFF REPORT A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DA TE Project Name: Owner/Applicant: Contact: File Number: Project Description: Project Location: Site Area: RECOMMENDA TION: Project Location Map City of Renton Department of Planning / Building / Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE March 29, 2005 Mosquito Abatement Program (2005-2009) City of Renton -Surface Water Utility Allen Quynn, Project Manager, Surface Water Utilities LUA-05-022, ECF Project Manager: Susan Fiala, AICP The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review in order to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another five (5) -year period, April 2005 through September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, baCkpack-mounted, portable blower. / Continued on next page Adjacent to and upland of the eastern edge of the Panther Creek Wetlands generally located between SR-167 on the west and Lake Avenue South/Talbot Road South on the east and extending from SW 43rd Street on the south to 1-405 on the north. 60 ± acres Staff recommends that the Environmental Review Committee Issue a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigat~d (DNS-M). ERe _Mosquito. doc City of Renton P/B/PW Department MOSQUITO ABATEMENT PROGRAM , )5-2009) En vir 'ental Review Committee Staff Report LUA-05-022, ECF REPORT OF MARCH 29, -2005 Page2of6 Project description continued: Continued recurrence of mosquito populations in the Talbot Hill area near the Panther Creek Wetland resulted. in citizen requests for continued mosquito control efforts_ In order to provide relief from the nuisance and discomfort caused by the mosquitoes, the Surface Water Utility applied for and was granted a 5-year SEPA determination of non-significance-mitigated. The program, similar to the 1994 program, was conducted from April 1995 to September 1999. The Surface Water Utility again applied for a 5-year SEPA determination to continue the program through to 2004. Permanone® 31-66 was replaced with BIOMIST® (Same chemical formulation but different trade name) and the use of Scourge® was discontinued. This was because Permanone® 31-66 was found to be much more effective then Scourge® in controlling mosquito populations and can be applied at a much lower concentration minimizing environmental impacts. Also, for the program years 2003 and 2004, a new product trade named Kontrol 4-4® was used in conjunction with BIOMIST®. Both products have the same ingredients and are applied at the same concentrations. With the expiration of the 2000 to 2004 SEPA determination, the Surface Water Utility is applying for another 5-year SEPA (April 2005 -September 2009). The proposed program for abatement of mosquitoes in the area adjacent to and the upland area of the Panther Creek Wetlands will be very similar to the program conducted in 2000-2004 (File No. LUA-00-025, ECF). It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable 510wer. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of ,twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away frOm water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agricylture approved application requirements. Information on the characteristics of BIOMIST® and directions for its use are contained in Exhibit A. Both BIOMIST® and Kontrol' 4-4® are insecticides that contain a synthetic version of permethrin as its active ingredient. These insecticides are formulated for dilution with oil products, such as mineral oil, and are to be applied at a rate between 0.0035 and 0.0070 pounds of permethrin per acre. BIOMIST® and Kontrol 4-4® degrade in soil and breaks down more slowly (24-48 hours) when compared to Scourge® (breaks down in a few hours), making it more effective in controlling mosquito populations. BIOMIST® and Kontrol 4-4® are the preferred insecticide because of their greater effectiveness. However, they are not to be applied within 100 feet of water. Permethrin is not on the list of pesticides with active ingredients named in the lawsuit filed against EPA by the Washington Toxics Coalition. The court ruling required that buffer zones be imposed on the specific pesticide that may be applied near water because of the potential impacts to salmon. The schedule for the proposed spraying program for the abatement of mosquitoes in the area adjacent to and the upland area of the Panther Creek Wetlands is typically from May through August each year of the proposed five-year program. The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. Following each treatment, the applicator will provide the City a brief summary of the area treated and the type of chemical used (BIOMIST®/Kontrol 4-4®), weather conditions during the treatment application, the time during which treatment was conducted, an estimate of the relative abundance and distribution of mosquitoes, and a recommendation on the scope and timing of subsequent treatment. City staff will conduct on-site monitoring of the treatment applications periodically. - The 60 plus acre area includes parcels zoned Residential-1 (R-1) and Residential-8 (R-8) dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Residential Single Family (RSF) and Residential Low Density (RLD). B. RECOMMENDATION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: ERC_Mosquito.doc DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Issue DNS with 14 da A eal Period. Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. DETERMINATION OF XX NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGA TED. xx Issue DNS-M with 14 da A eal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. City of Renton PIBIPW Department MOSQUITO ABATEMENT PROGRAM \ J5-2009) REPORT OF MARCH 29, 2005 C. MITIGATION MEASURES . Envirr· 'ental Review Committee Staff Report LUA-05-022, ECF Page30f6 1. To prevent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift into the Panther Creek Wetlands, application shall only be made as conditions permit in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above which treatment shall not be conducted. Wind speeds determined by the applicator at the time of treatment must be 10 miles per hour or less and must be blowing in an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek Wetlands or the treatment shall not be conducted. 2. Equipment wash-down water shall be disposed of off-site in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface or ground waters. 3. Accidental spills shall be reported immediately by the applicator to the City of Renton, the State Department of Health, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Ecology (spills in water). Appropriate measures shall be immediately implemented by the applicator to first contain and then to clean up the spill in accordance with Department of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requirements. Only small quantities of the proposed insecticide will be on the project site to minimize impacts if a spill occurs. 4. The City of Renton Project Manager/Representative shall: a) Provide written information which fully describes the proposed abatement program and schedule to all property owners YJithin the proposed project area; and b) Conduct the program only on City property and on those privately owned parcels for which authorization has been received from the property owner or the owner's legal representative; and c) Post a description and schedule of the program at regular intervals in the vicinity of the project area. The information will include the name and telephone number of a City representative who can provide further information about the program to interested parties. 5. The insecticide spraying must be conducted in upland areas away from water areas and homes by a licensed applicator in accordance with EPA (Federal InsectiCide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act or FIFRA) and Department of Agriculture (WAC-16-228) approved application requirements. 6. The applicator will immediately notify the City of Renton and stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement program. No animal kill is expected because BIOMIST®/Kontrol 4-4®, when used according to the manufacturer's instructions as approved by EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. The mitigation measures included in this determination are proposed by the applicant in the project application documents. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all mitigation is implemented as proposed, and that any additional information requiring review is submitted and approved prior to starting work. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 1. Earth/Environmental Assessment Impacts: The topography of the/area can be described as having moderate to steep slopes with some slopes near 100 percent vertical. No disturbance of the slopes is proposed. The soils in the area include: Beausite (Be), Alderwood (Ag), Indianola (In), and Seattle, (Sk) series. The proposal would not require clearing of vegetation and would not result in earth disturbance; therefore, no further mitigation is recommended. ERe_Mosquito,doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department MOSQUITO ABATEMENT PROGRAM I /5-2009) REPORT OF MARCH 29, 2005 Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation is recommended. Policy Nexus: N/A. 2. Water Enviri 'ental Review Committee Staff Report LUA-05-022, ECF Page 4 0'6 Impacts: Portions of the project are within 200 feet of the Panther Creek Wetlands. No work will occur in the wetlands. Work will occur adjacent to the wetlands in the upland areas on the hillside east of the wetlands. Spraying of BIOMIST®/Kontrol 4-4® is not permitted to, or within 100-feet of, water or wetlands. However, insecticide spray may drift in the air out of the treatment area. Surface water runoff enters the Panther Creek Wetlands from the Rolling Hills Creek to the north, from Panther Creek to the south,' and from local drainage flows from the east. Groundwater seepage daylights from the hillside and flows into the Panther Creek Wetlands. Waste from accidental spills of insecticide or equipment wash-down water may potentially enter the ground or surface waters. To reduce and prevent any potential impacts to surface and groundwater, the applicant (the City) proposes the following mitigation measures. • To prevent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift into the Panther Creek Wetlands, application may only be made as conditions permit in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above which treatment may not be conducted. Wind speeds determined by the applicator at the time of treatment must be 10 miles per hour or less and must be blowing in an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek Wetlands or the treatment may not be conducted. • Equipment wash-down water is to be disposed of off-site in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface or ground waters. • Accidental spills are to be reported immediately by the applicator to the City of Renton, the State Department of Health, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Ecology (spills in water). Appropriate measures are to be immediately implemented by the applicator to first contain and then to clean up the spill in accordance with Department of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requirements. Only small quantities of the proposed insecticide will be on the project site to minimize impacts if a spill occurs. Mitigation Measures: 1. To prevent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift into the Panther Creek Wetlands, application shall only be made as conditions permit in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above which treatment shall not be conducted. Wind speeds determined by the applicator at the time of treatment must be 10 miles per hour or less and must be blowing in an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek Wetlands or the treatment shall not be conducted. 2. Equipment wash-down water shall be disposed of off-site in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface 'or ground waters. 3. Accidental spills shall be reported immediately by the applicator to the City of Renton, the State Department of Health, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Ecology (spills in water). Appropriate measures shall be immediately implemented by the applicator to first contain and then to clean up the spill in accordance with Department of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requirements. Only small quantities of the proposed insecticide will be on the project si~e to minimize impacts if a spill occurs. Policy Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations; EPA; State Departments of Agriculture, Health, and Ecology (DOE). 3. Air Impacts: The insecticide would be applied to brush and other vegetation in a low concentration mist using a gasoline- powered, backpack mounted, portable sprayer. Quantity or application rate is between approximately 0.0035 and 0.0070 pounds per acre. To prevent excess drift application may only be made if wind speeds are 10 miles per hour or less. ERe_Mosquito.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department MOSQUITO ABATEMENT PROGRAM I. ./5-2009) REPORT OF MARCH 29, 2005 Envirrental Review Committee Staff Report LUA-05-022, ECF Page50f6 Furthermore, the applicant proposes mitigation to ensure public health and safety of the potential of drifting insecticides into .the air by providing notice of the schedule and conducting the abatement only on City property and privately owned parcels for which authorization has been given. Mitigation Measures: 1. The City of Renton Project Manager/Representative shall: a) Provide written information which fully describes the proposed abatement program and schedule to all property owners within the proposed project area; and b) Conduct the program only on City property and on those privately owned parcels for which authorization has been received from the property owner or the owner's legal representative; and c) Post a description and schedule of the program at regular intervals in the vicinity of the project area. The information will include the name and telephone number of a City representative who can provide further information about the program to interested parties. Policy Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 4. AnimalsIWildlife Impacts: According to the SEPA Checklist, five wildlife census studies were conducted annually from 1989 to 1993 in the Panther Creek Wetlands to characterize the type and abundance of species in the complex and to determine what, if any, impact the 1989 -1993 treatment program had on the eXisting fauna. The surveys were added as a condition of implementing the 1989 -1993 program in the Hearing Examiner's decision to deny an appeal of the 1989 - 1993 program's environmental determination. The surveys found that the Panther Creek Wetlands continues to be a generally stable wildlife community, with some reduction in the number of amphibian and aquatic species captured. However, factors other than reduction of the available insect populations resulting from the treatment program were also noted as probably causes for the fewer number of captures, such as drought and sampling/behavioral considerations. As with the previous 1995 -1999 program, water treatment is not included in the proposed program primarily because- of the treatment's high cost and questionable effectiveness. Applying chemicals to water is also contrary to City Policy to improve and protect the quality of the -City's surface water and wetlands. Further study to definitively determine the probable cause of decline in captures of these species is not warranted because the scope of this 'program is limited to upland spraying. It is the water treatment, rather than the land treatment, that poses a more direct impact to the abundance of insect larvae fed upon by aquatic predators. The species for which the land treatment poses a most direct impact were found by the census to have continued to be abundant and divers.e. To minimize any potential impacts to animals from the insecticides, the applicant proposes as a mitigation measure that the insecticide spraying must be conducted in upland areas away from water areas and homes by a licensed applicator in accordance with EPA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act or FIFRA) and Department of Agriculture (WAC-16-228) approved application requirements. Also, it is recommended that the applicator will iiTlmediately notify the City of Renton ,and stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement program. No animal kill is expected because BIOMIST®/Kontrol 4-4®, when used according to the manufacturer's instructions as approved by EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. Mitigation Measures: 1. The insecticide spraying must be conducted in upland areas away from water areas and homes by a'licensed applicator in accordance with EPA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act or FIFRA) and Department of Agriculture (WAC-16-228) approved application requirements. 2. The applicator will immediately notify the City of Renton and stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement program. No animal kill is expected because BIOMIST®/Kontrol 4-4®, when used according to the manufacturer's instructions as approved by EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. Policy Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations; EPA and Department of Agriculture regulations. ERG_Mosquita,doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department MOSQUITO ABATEMENT PROGRAM . Envirr . 'ental Review Committee Staff Report LUA-05-022, ECF REPORT OF MARCH 29, 2005 Page6of6 5. Environmental Health Impacts: The waste from accidental spills of insecticide or equipment wash down water may potentially pose a health hazard to aquatic organisms. The spray may drift into areas not intended for treatment. Spill Response Assistance is not anticipated. The quantity of insecticide on the project site at anyone time will not exceed 9 gallons of diluted insecticide concentrate. No undiluted insecticide concentrate would be on the site. Only small quantities of the proposed insecticides would be on the project site and would be stored, handled, and disposed of in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements. In the event of a spill, appropriate measures will be implemented. To ensure the health of the residents and aquatic organisms, the mitigation measures outlined in the previous sections should adequately address any potential impacts. Mitigation Measures: See Air, Water and Animal sections for mitigation measures. Policy Nexus: See previous sections. E. . COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been Incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. -L Copies of all Review Comments are contained In the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on April 19, 2005. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. ERe_Mosquito.doc NeighArlloodDetaii Map/&tePlan .. Vl Q) > « u . SW 21st St SW 27th St Note: TREATMENT WILL NOT BE APPLIED WITHIN 100' OF WATER. TREATMENTS WILL NOT . BE PERFORMED NEARHOMES. TREATMENT WILL ONLY BE DONE ON THE UPLAND AREA BETWEEN THE WETLAND EASTERN EDGE AND THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS. PROPERTY ·OWNER APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO TREATMENT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. Mosquito Abatement Program (2005-2009) N o 1000 2000 nee ecce c:c:c:cc~ 1 : 12000 <r: ~ ""'" ~ ~ ~ BIOMIST® 4+12· ULV [81!'i]~~~ For Application Only By Public Health Officials and Trained Personnel of Mosquito Abatement Districts and Other Mosquito Control Programs. An All Temperature, Quick Knockdown, Low Odor, Non-Corrosive, Synthetic Pyrethroid for Control of Adult Mosquitoes in Residential and Recreational Areas. Also For Use Against Biting and Non-Biting Midges and Blackflies. Precautionary Statements HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS CAUTION t-1;;'ml,,1 II swallowed ~I illJso'bcd II110ugn skin. Avoid conlact witll Skin, eyes o' dolling May cause con:aci £~nsilil.alion following lepe3ied contaci wiln Skin in SUsceptible individualS. Wa~ I~ClolJyld( "lIel nandhl10 AVOi(llll~.alhin!l 01 miSI. 00 not contaminate fOod 01 leed plOductS. STATEMENT OF PRACTICAL TREATMENT II ~w.lllr·"'eo Call il pnYSlclan 01 POI$on Conllol Cenlel i,nlntcltately Gastric lavage is "'N,lle,) tI male"al 'N~S I~ken Inte,nally. DO NOT INDUCE VOMITING. Vomiting may C:;ItIS~ ;hf,ILlIIOn prClImonla "II~I'.W·') K('mo'lC "'~I,m 10 Iresn all Apply 31tlloclal re~pllallOn illndlcated II 011 S"II' R~rnov~ r.onl~m"latea clolhlng and wash affected areas With soap and 'N .'·l~1 1f;1 F,.e~ FI",II eye, ""Ih ole,lIv til walel Gel mealcal altenlion if irrilation ~ersists. ACTIVE INGREDIENTS: Permethrin 13·pnenoxypllenyllmethyl (t) cis. Irans·3-(2.2.dichlorethenY'I·2.2·dimethyl· cyclopropanecarboxylate. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . .. . 4.00'"w/w Technical Piperonyl Buto~ide ....•..... . . .. .. t2.00 .... INERT INGREDIENTS .....•................... -1!.Q.0·" _ Contains petroleum dislillates. 100.00 .... w/w Contains 0.3 pounds 01 Permetllrin and 0.9 pounds of Plperonyl Butoxide per gallon CAUTION KEEP OUT OF REACH U.L.V. Nontherm.1 Aero,ol (Co14 Fog) Application: To cOlltrol Mosquitoes Midges and Blackflies, apply 8101ll1ST· ~.t2 ULV using any standard U.L.V. groune applicalor capable 01 producing a nonthermal aerosol spray with drOplets ranging ir slza Irom 5 to 30 micronsand a mass median diameter (MMOI of 10 to 20 miclons Appl~ Ihe product undiluted ata Ilowral. 014.5 10 18.00 fluidounces pel minute at anaveragl vehicle speed 0110 mph. If a dillerent vehicle speed is used. adlust rale acCordinQI~ (see previous cnart). Tllese rates are equivalent to .0017 to .007 pounds of Permatn'lr and .005 to .021 pounds 01 Piperonyl Bilto_ide per acre. Vary flow rale according It vegetation danslty and mosquito population. Use hlgnar flow rate In heavy vagetahor or when populations ale hig,. An accurate flow meter must bf used to ensure Ih. proper flow rate. For preper appUcauon. mount tlla log applicalor so Ihat Ihe nozzlt i! at least 4'// feet aboveground levJUnd directed oul the back ollhe vellicle. Failure Ie !ollow the above directi.oDsmtavlRult in reduced et/activeness Aerial application: equipment capaNe ot prodUCing droptets witt ." "~Dre tllan2.So.;.exceecino 100 micrOIlS. flow ral. "~'i~clli'v~i-O fluid ounces of BIOMIST· 4"2 UL \ lilrirll1W'liI4It than'O MPH Do not apply dileclly te OF ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS 'I:M .lI.!l--m:;-.A.<J.fOOv,-"_.-••.• -. _. ___ eltceptinernergencysituallo,sandwithtn ", .. ~"r"lIJ1tGvillllir_rI6rida Deoartment of Agriculture a~d Consumer Services. This prOduct is extremely toxic: to fish and aquatic invertebrates. Oo'not apply dlreol· Iy to wate~, to areas where surface water is present or to Intertidal areas below the mean high water mariI. Dc not apply when weather conditions favor drift Irom treated areas. Drift and runoff (rom trealed areas may be hazardous to aquaUc organisms In ."';':..' "". ,". • neighboring areas. Do not allow spray Ireatment to drift on pastureland, goplsn'l • ..., ;~-:". ; poultry ranges or water supplies. Do not contaminate water when disposlria'or.equill~ ,'.{ ~ol~' ment washwaters. "-01, --:~~~ t~ .. \. ~ .. ~ ,.:,." PHYSICAL OR CHEMIC~L HA~A~DS ... ;,~~ I~"; ·4~" 1'10 nOI ",. or siore Ilear reat or open flame Flashpillnt mrnimum'd'I"HO"F • .'!i;· '''~~t= 'Zl"t . ~ ".,", ,.,,".. ':\:.~t. 1, ~h l. DIRECTIONS ~9t:1.u.sEi:~·;·:!.i:~;; ..• !;, '.. CLARKE MOSQUITO CONTROL Ills a violation of Federal Law to use this prOd~t)~ ~8nn.rliiCon.I.I.nt PRODUCTS INC wllh lis' labeling. .' .• ". .':' " • ,,\.~ ••• ~~~;:" •. 1 '59 N. GARDEN AVENUE " CONDITIONS and R1'TES to USE ROSELLE, ILLINOIS 60172 for MOSQUITO CONTROL P.,melhrin/P90 "ppUcaUon Aai •• fl. oa. 8Iomla'-4'12 poulldl/ure Fl. ol./Mtn. per .ere SMPH 10MPH 15MPH 000710 021 9.0 18.0 270' 30 00035/00105 4S 9.0 13.5 15 O.0017~/O 00525 2.25 4.5 675 0.75 Do not appl)' Ihls prOduct· witllin 100 teel (3D melerS) 01 lakes and streams. RIOMIS T" 4' t2 ULV is recommended lor apDI,cation as an ultra low lIolume (U.l.V.1 1l')'IIII~ll\1al UIOSol (COla togl to control adull mosquiloes in residen"al and recrea· :IIInal ,t! <;" ..... hel e Ihese 11l~p.clsare II ploblem. For best results treat when mosquitoes .11,: mllSI illtrvc ~1\(1 'Healhcl concliliolls are conOuciveto keeping Ihe log close to the ')"I"I'~ I' 9 r.nnllp.mperaturr.s and wind speed nOI grtaler lOan 10 mpn. Application ,1/1"."11 II\r COOl I\OU,S 01 Ihc nighl or eally mornino is usu~Uy preferable. Repeal "".1:11",,,1 iI~ 1)f!"d~ll Cnllsull Ihc p'cvious :hart lor application rates. E.P.A. EST. No. 83291LOl EPA. Reg. No. 8329-34 NET CONTENTS 2.5 GALS. LOT NO. _______ _ NOTICE: Seller makes no warranly. expressed or implied concern·. ing the use of IIIIS product other than indicated on the tabel. Buyer assumes all risk G' use and lor handling 0' Ihis materiat w~ell use alld lor nandling is contrary to laDe I inslructio'ls. Do not contaminale waler. load or lee~ by storage or disposal. PESTICIDE STORAGE AND SPILL PROCEDURES: Siore upright at 10010 temperalure. Avoid elposure to exlreme leJnperal~res. In case of spill 01 lea~aOI. soak up with an atise/bent material such as sana. sawdust earth. luller's earth. etc. Dispose 01 wilh Chemical waste. PESTICIDE DISPOSAL: Wastes resulting Irom the use of Ihis product m~y De dispOSed 01 on site or an approved waste disposallacihty. CONTAINER DISPOSAL: Triple rinse tor equivalent) then o'ler tOI recycitno or racondilioning. or puncture and dispose ot i,l a sanitary landfill .. or by othel approved stale and local procedures. CONTAINERS ONE GALLON AND SMALLER: Do not reuse containel. Wr ap conlalners In several layers 01 newspaper and discard in Irash. CONTAINERS LARGER THAN ONE GALLON: Metal Containers-Triple rinse or equivalent. Then offer lor recyeling(5) recondltionina. or Dunelure and dispose olin a sanitary landlill. or by other .... ·;;a:,,'u.c ~",., .. - authorities. Plaslic Conlalners-Trip)e or recondllloning. or puncture and Incineration. or il allowed by stale and loca out 01 smoke. Then dispose 01 in a sanitary b"ttfru.",..l\u local IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, CALL INFO TRAC PESTle., ..;S SUBJECT TO BUFFER ZONES IN WASH ... \iTON STATE Pesticide/ESA Effects Determinations Listed by Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU)l EXHIBITB Buffers required -"may affect" delennination or no detennination made 10 dale No buffers -"no effect" or "may, but not likely 10 adversely affect" delennination Click on the waterbody name for a specific ESU in the foDewing lable 10 view a delailed map in Adobe Aaobal PDF Format. The maps, produced by NOAA Fisheries, show the ESU geogpraphic boundaries. WSDA has developed county-specific maps to identify saimon-l>earing streams within the ESUs and provided a lisl of exceptions to the buffers required by the final ruling in Washington Toxies Coarllion, el aI., v. EPA. The effects delennination analysis and supporting documentation for each active ingredient may be viewed at epa.gov/oppfeadl/endanger/effects/. Actlve Ingredient InfonnaHon Chum Chum S_h.ad SIooI_ Chlnoolt 5 ...... 001 -or-Chlnool< • An Evoiutlonariiy Significant Unft or "ESU" Is a distinctive group of Pacific salmon or steelhead. • -No eIred" detennlnatlon based on aop use of 2, +D. When used to control aquatic weeds, 2, +D "may effect" aD ESUs. • Only high application rate crops willi use during the winter or late winter seasons (peaches. filberts and walnuts) exceed lewis of concern, Oiuron use on other crops wDI have no effect on listed salmon and steelhead. • There Is believed to be a large amount of diuron use on rights-of-way and other non-crop sites In Washington, The "may effect" detennination Is based on the high label application rates, the polenliaJ direcI and Indirect effects of dluron at high rales, and the uncertainty of exposure. 12123104 WSDA Endangered Species Program Page 1 PESTICI:':S SUBJECT TO BUFFER ZONES IN WASHtTON STATE Pesticide/ESA Effects Determinations Listed by Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU)' EXHlBITB Buffers required -"may affect" determination or no determination made to date No buffers -"no effecr or "may, but not likely to adversely affect" determination C~ck on the waterbody narne lor a specific ESU in the following table to view a detailed map in Adobe Acrobat PDF Formal The maps, produced by NOM Fisheries, show the ESU geogpraphic boundaries. WSDA has developed county-specific maps to identify salmon-bearing streams within the ESUs and provided a list of exceptions to the buffers required by the final ruling in Washington Toxles Coafition, et aI., v. EPA The effects determination analysis and supporting documentation for each active ingredient may be viewed at epa.QOv/oppfead1/endanger/effectsJ . Active ingredient information Chum Chum Sleelh.ad SteeI .... d Chinook Sleel_ Soeby. Chinook • Home owner uses make Up a large poI1Ion of the non-crop malalhlon use, However, few states track home owner use data and many numeric app/lcallon rates and/or Intervals. The "may effect" determination lor norH:rOp use is based on concem from home owner use_ 12123/04 WSOA Endangered Spac:les Program City of I .on Department of Planning / Building / PubliL . _Jrks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWiNG DEPARTMENT: -~~F'rt COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 22, 2005 , ~ APPLICATION NO: LUA05-022, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MARCH 8,2005 APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Susan Fiala _ PROJECT TITLE: Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson R E'in:"i"VE n SITE AREA: 60 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A MAW n" ",. ..... II OJ LUUJ LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area WORK ORDER NO: 77389 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental revie:t~/a~~WnC%P~V~~ito Abatement Program for another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, ., portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements.The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where authorization has been received. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary EnvIronment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water UghtlGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS , tion with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or ation is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date I City of • ion Department of Planning / Building / Pub/i" _,orks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: fhn ~ COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 22, 2005 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-022, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MARCH 8, 2 PROJECT MANAGER: Susan Fiala uito Abatement Pro ram 2005-2009 PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 60 acres BUILDING AREA ross: N/A LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area I WORK ORDER NO: 77389 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental review to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program f()r another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic.insecticide.spray,.tobrush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack~mounted, , ... , :.: .;, ;"~ .. ::; portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements.The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels. to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where authorization has been received. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More EnvIronment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of I. on Department of Planning / Building / Public. rks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 22, 2005 DATE CIRCULATED: MARCH 8, 2005 APPLICANT: Ci of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Susan Fiala PROJECT TITLE: Mos uito Abatement Pro ram 2005-2009 PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 60 acres BUILDING AREA ross: NlA LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area I WORK ORDER NO: 77389 BUILDING DIVISION SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental review to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low .. .. ;;;;..volume.(ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using,a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements.The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where authorization has been received. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water UghtlGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy! Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14 000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with. particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of I In Department of Planning / Building / Public, Jrks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: j:'j r-e COMMENTS DUE: MARC~, ~~ ~ r \W F? ~ APPLICATION NO: LUA05-022, ECF !' I DATE CIRCULATED: MARCH ~::~ )5 I APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Susan I Mal. UAR -Q ?nnl; G I .... '--'"' PROJECT TITLE: Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 60 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A CITY OF RENTON riJ1C Utr'AtI Ililti~ I LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area WORK ORDER NO: 77389 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental review to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements.The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where authorization has been received. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Informat/on Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinq Air Aesthetics Water LiqhtlGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy! Historic/Cultural Natural Resources PreseNation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. tion with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or on i, needed 10 properly .,,'" Ih" fXOPO"'l. '1ft! if{ ~ Date~/ City of f.. on Departme~t of Planning / Butlding / Public rks ENVIRONMENTAL & DE.VELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 22, 2005 APPLICATION NO:. LUA05-022, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MARCH 8, 2005 r-,::::,=-:-:=-::':"'".:'=-:~-, APPLICANT: Ci of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Susan Fiala PROJECT TITLE: Mos uito Abatement Pro ram2005-2009 PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson MARS · .. ·:2005 SITE AREA: 60 acres -LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area WORK ORDER NO: 77389 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The CitY of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental review to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. Themosquito abatement'program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide,·sprayJo.:brushand other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted,-... ~: ,_ .. ~. C'_ '.".';- portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice perweek generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements.The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where. authorization has been received. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Li.qhtlGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet .. 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS !Utt:.~~ C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional ihformation is needed to properly assess this proposal. !'lth~t~ to &,C/ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date I City of. ion Department of Planning / Building / Publi!. ~orks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 22, 200.s. ~o":o,-"T()N APPLICATION NO: LUA05-022, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MARCH 8, 20051 E t'E' V ED APPLICANT: Ci of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Susan Fiala PROJECT TITLE: Mos uito Abatement Pro ram 2005-2009 PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 60 acres BUILDING AREA ross: N1A BUILDING LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area I WORK ORDER NO: 77389 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental review to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjac€lnt to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low .~, . "":,~".i .volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation· using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements.The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where authorization has been received. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More EnvIronment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water UghVGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS Nq/VC We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where dditional information is need to properly assess this proposal. Si City of. ton Department of Planning / Building / Pub/h, ~. orks ENVIRONMENTA~ & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ~ COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 22, 2005 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-022, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MARCH 8, 2005 APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Susan Fiala PROJECT TITLE: Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 60 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): NlA LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area I WORK ORDER NO: 77389 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental review to continue a Mosquito ' Abatement Program for another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. The mosquitq abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered,ba~kpack-mounted, portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements.The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maxir,n,um frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where authorization has been received. ":' . A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable ,Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Wafer Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transoortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS ~WA-IW~~ ;Iv ~/i:J, We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Dater l City of.n Department of Planning / Building / pUbliAs ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: APPLICATION NO: LUA05-022, ECF APPLICANT: Ci of Renton PROJECT TITLE: Mos uito Abatement Pro ram 2005-2009 SITE AREA: 60 acres BUILDING AREA ross: N/A LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area I WORK ORDER NO: 77389 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental review to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements.The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where authorization has been received. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water LiahtiGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. s~"~9£di2, A'-"'ad Rep .. ,.ma"" 3-/0-0.( Date DATE: March 8, 2005 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA05-022, ECF PROJECT NAME: Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requests environmental review to continue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009. The mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted, portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted· in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicatorlentomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements. The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. The program would be conducted only on City-owned property and on privately owned parcels where authorization has been received. PROJECT LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21 C.11 0, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS- M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for· the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance- Mitigated (DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: February 24, 2005 March 8, 2005 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Allen Quynn, City of Renton; Tel: (425) 430-7247 PermltsiRevlew Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Environmental (SEPA) Review Not applicable. No other government approvals or permits are required for spraying in upland areas, away from water and wetland areas, when conducted by a licensed applicator in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements. N/A Planning/Building/Public Works Department, Development Services Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 The project would take place in the Residential-1 dulac (R-1) and Residential-8 dulac (R-8) zoning designations and within the Residential Single Family (RSF) Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist There are no development regulations applicable to proposal. Proposed Mitigation Mea! • In order to ensure the p",-.. Iic health and safety, the City will: 1) provide written ....... rmation which fully describes the proposed abatement program and schedule to all property owners within the proposed project area; 2) conduct the program only on City property and on those privately owned parcels for which authorization has been received from the property owner or the owner's legal representative; 3) post a description and schedule of the program at regular intervals in the vicinity of the project area. The information will include the name and telephone number of a City representative who can provide further information about the program to interested parties. • The insecticide spraying must be conducted in upland areas away from water areas and homes by a licensed applicator in accordance with EPA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act or FIFRA) and Department of Agriculture (WAC-16-228) approved application requirements. • To prevent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift into the Panther Creek Wetlands, application may only be made as conditions permit in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above which treatment may not be conducted. Wind speeds determined by the applicator at the time of treatment must be 10 miles per hour or less and must be blowing in an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek Wetlands or the treatment may not be conducted. • Equipment wash-down water is to be disposed of off-site in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface or ground water. • Accidental spills are to be reported immediately by the applicator to the City of Renton, King County Department of Health, the State Department of Health, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Ecology (spillS in water). Appropriate measures are to be immediately implemented by the applicator to first contain and then to clean up the spill in accordance with Department of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requirements. Because only small quantities (see Section B.7.a.1 of the Environmental Checklist) of the proposed insecticide will be on the project site, the quantity of insecticide that may spill is anticipated to pose little impact. • The applicator will immediately notify the City of Renton and stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement program. No animal kill is expected because BIOMIST®/Kontrol 4-4®, when used according to the manufacturer's instructions as approved by EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on March 22, 2005. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner; Tel: (42S) 430-7382 I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. File No.lName: LUA05-022, ECF I Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 NAME: MAILING' ADDRESS: , TELEPHONE NO.: -'- Proposed MItigation Measural: In order to ensure the public health and safety. the City wilt: 1) provide written Information which fully describes the proposed abatement program and schedule to all property owners within the proposed project area; 2) conduct the program only on City property and on those privately owned parcels for which authorization has besn received from the property owner' or the owner's legal representaUve; 3) post a description and schedule of the program at regular Intervals In the vicinity of the project area. The information will Include the name and telephone number of a City representative who can provide further Information about the program to interested parties. The Insecticide spraying must be conducted In upland areas away from water areas and homes by a licensed applicator In accordance with EPA (Federallns8Ctlclde, Fungicide and RodenticIde Act or FIFRA) and Department of Agrlcunure (WAC-16-228) approved appllca110n requirements. To prevent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift Into the Panther Creek Weilands, application may only be made as conditions permit In accordance w~h EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application reqUirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above whIch treatment may nol be conducted. Wind speeds delsnnlned by the applJcator at the tIme of treatment must be 10 mUes per hour or less and must be blowIng In an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek Wetlands or the treatment may not be conducted. EquIpment wash-down water is to be dIsposed of off-site in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface or ground water. Accidental spills are to be reported immediately by the applicator to the City of Aenton, King County Department of Health, the State Department Of Health, the Department of AgrIculture, and the Department of Ecology (spills in -. water). Appropriate measures are to be Immediately implemented by the applicator to first contain end then 10 clean . up the spill in accordance wIth Departmenl of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requlremenls. Because only small quanmles (see Section 8.7 .a.1 of 1he Environmental Checklist) of the proposed Insecticide will be on 1he project sl1e. the quantl1y of Insecticide that may spill Is anticlpeted to pose little Impact. The applicator wlllimmedlataly notify the CIty of Renton and stop treatment If any animals are killed In associatIon with the abatemenl program. No animal kill, Is expected because 810MISTlb'Kontroi 4·4®, when used according to the manufacturer's Instructlons as approved by EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. Comments on the above appllca110n mUlt be Iubmltted In writing to SUlan Fiala, Senior Planner, Deyelopment Servlcel Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on March 22, 2005. II you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of racord and receIve additional notiflcatfon by maU, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits wriUen comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7382 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION If you would like to be made a party of record 10 receive further Information on 1hls proposed projec1, comple1e: this fonn and return 10: Ci1y of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. File No./Name: LUAOS-022, ECF I Mosqul10 Abatemen1 Program 2005-2009 NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: ________________ ~-------- TELEPHONE NO.: _______ _ DATE: March 8. 2005 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA05-Q22. ECF PRDJECT NAME: Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Renton Surface Water Utility requesls envIronmental review 10 conllnue a Mosquito Abatement Program for another 5-year period, between April 2005 and September 2009 Th mosquito abatement program covers an area adjacent to and upland from the Panther Creek Wetland. It will consl~1 onl; of land lreatmenl applicatIons of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insectiCide spray to brush and other upland vegetatIon using a gasoJlne-powered, backpaCk-mounted, portable blower. The spraying will only be conducted at a ma,xlmum ~requency of twice per week generally durIng Ihe months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted In upland areas away from water or watland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as condItIons allow and In accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved applicatIon requirements. The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months If mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twlce per week, between 8:00 AM 10 7:00 PM. ~::nPr~g;~~Uld be conducted only on City-owned property and on prIvately owned parcels where authorization has PROJECT LOCATION: Panther Creek Wetland Area OPTIONAl.DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency. the CI1y of Renton has ~etermlned that significant environmen~1 impacts B!'9 unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as pe~m~ted under ~he RCW 43.21 C.110, the City of Renton IS using the Optional ONS·M process to give notice that a DNS. M IS likely to be Issued, Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS.M Bra integrated Into a single commenl period. There wlJl be no commenl period following the issuance of the Threshold Oeterminallon of Non-Signlficance-MItigated (DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow thels.uance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICAnON DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: February 24, 2005 March 6. 2005 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Allen Quynn, CI1y of Renton; Tel: (425) 431).7247 Pennltl/Reylew Requelted: Environmental (SEPA) Review Other Permits which may be required: Not applicable. No other govemment approvals or permlls are required for spraying In upland areas, away from water and wetland areas, when conducted by a licensed applicator In accordance with the Environmental Prot~ctlon Agency (EPA) and Department 01 Agriculture approved application reqUIrements. Requelted Studl .. : Location whare application may be reviewed: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: ZonlnglLand Uee: Environmental Documents that EYaluate the Propoe8d Project: Development Regulations Used For Project MltlgaUon: N/A Plannlng/8ulldlng/Publlc Works Department, Development Services DIVision, Sixth Floor Ren10n City Hall. 1055 South GraclyWay. Renton. WA 98055 The proJect would take place In the Residential-1 dulac (R-1) and Residential-8 dulac (R·e) zonIng desIgnations and within Ihe ResIdential Single Family (RSF) Comprehensive Plan Land Use dasignatlon. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist There are no development regulations applicable to proposal. CERTIFICA TION I, S~ TUf.?JJ,er: ., hereby certify that 10 copies of ~he above document wer;poste4ty me in ..ill-conspicuous places or nearby the descnbed property on : .. ----;~)I~,;;·~.~TE: 4~ SIGNED-#rt~ -"'O"~M/Ss'" " . . S fW· . i CfJ .... v 10 '. ubscribed and sworn (before me, _~::yPUbhC, In an?r the tate 0 as ngt~ f ~! .... ~OJ:,,,,, . ~ ,on the ~(o\1r day of ~ .. ~ . ::;;·'f2N~O~TA2f~P~U=BL~I'C1S').IG~N~A~T~U~R~E~'~ ~ -4 ~ ~ • '~:!. m ~ ~ ttl ~ ~" ~: :t! : ~ o"'~ "<Ie co: .,:: 't ,<,' ~.9. ...:: I.. ". "'0''''' •• -: ""C. L. -_. r .' _ .. -~ ............ \ ~ ·ft '8""NG10\~ ...... "'- ,.,\\\\\\\ ................... .. MAAIL VN KAMCHEFF MV~TMOOEXmfS ~.?fU17 CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 8th day of March, 2005, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing NOA, PMT, E~vironmental Checklist documents. This information was sent to: Surrounding Property Owners -NOA ONLY See Attached Agencies See Attached (Signature of Send J7-~~~~c.....::::::s:~~~=-----_____ ~~' ... A \'" rV11\.f, "" ........ O~" .. ~~"sSION ;;';:,0" ~\ :0 ~\OTAt., ~ ... ~ ~ :() ,... 'Ty ft\~ ~ ~ : ..... 00: ~ ~ . . '" . ,. ~ (/l ~. ..oUBUC .: :. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker ~, ~ ..... .... ~ j signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and vOlunta~~6fCi~.~_.tfnd purposes mentioned in the instrument. ' •••• , f: WAS~\ ......... -- ,\\,\. ,'\.~"" ..... ,, Dated: -3174 lo? I STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING of Washington Notary (Print): __ ---:-M~A.;:.;RI~LYN~KAM==C::H=EFF==_~------------ My appointment expires: MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES 6-29-07 Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 LUA05-022, ECF Dept. of Ecology * Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Stewart Reinbold * Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * c/o Department of Ecology Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 3190 160th Ave SE 39015-172nd Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * : Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015172nd Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation* Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Jamey Taylor * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo City of Newcastle City of Kent .. Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA981,88 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. * Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. L template -affidavit of service by mailing I i 886050025008 1ST HORIZON 3400 188TH ST SW #400 LYNNWOOD WA 98037 722200036100 ALLEN ELMA 1906 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 889900004009 ANTRIM JAY S+MICHELLE A 2601 SHATTUCK CT S RENTON WA 98055 855860000501 AUSTIN GAIL 3500 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 948575913008 BATIZ LUIS S 737 S 32ND RENTON WA 98055 334040116009-Ni~C~~I-c., BELL RAYMOND L ~2.\'O~$~Ol 16425 8TH AV S SEATTLE WA 98148 302305911505 BERRY PAUL 3129 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 507000010003 BHAN CHANDAR 3504 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575041009 BRAUN NONAJ 606 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 889921075004 BUIDAT 518 S 28TH PL RENTON WA 98055 )310001009· . AFUCIO· .. C/O EPROPERTY TAX DEPT#120 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE AZ 85261 334040112503 ALLEN JUSTIN P 1801 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200037504 ARMSTRONG LEA ANNE+SKURA PRISCILLA+ARMSTRONG/SKURA 1934 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 989920004003 BALDRIDGE BRUCE T 3422 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305911307 BAUTISTA EUGENIO C JR+LYNEL 3407 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 855740000507 BENTLEY PAUL 2123 SHATTUCK PL S RENTON WA 98055 722200042009 BEST WILLlAM+LEWIS,VERONICA 2109 SHATTUCKAV S RENTON WA 98055 507000014005 BLISS SHIRLEY A 3604 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040114509 BROWN WAYNE ARTHUR JR 1711 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575030002 BUI DON+NGA PT NGUYEN-BUI 710 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 507000001002 AGOO SILVER D+GRACE T 3621 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305909400 AN MARCO 9125 10TH AV S SEATTLE WA 98108 302305907107 ATWAL SUKHWINDER+BALWINDER 3340 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 334040134002 BALLESTRASSE BRUNA 1804 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 507000012009 BEAN BRAD ERIC 402 S 36TH ST RENTON WA 98055 507000013007 BERG BRIAN D & ANNABELLE L 408 S 36TH ST RENTON WA 98055 302305908303 BEYOND PETROLEUM C/O BP AMERICA INC PO BOX 5015 BUENA PARK CA 90622 507000005003 BOSTICK HARRY G 3527 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040112008 BRYANTON EUNICE W 1803 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200043007 CAIRNES CONSTRUCTION LLC 14845 SE 264TH ST KENT WA 98032 507000008007 CAMERINI DONALD A+CARMEL D 3503 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040134507 CAPELLARO WANDA N 1728 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575033006 -"bD Such it=-?>\\\D\cb CHAN WALTER K+LUZ S VELASCO 9856 SO 168TH PL RENTON WA 98055 886050006008 CHAVIS ELROY 302 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 948575034004 CHEN TAl AN 648 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 722200037108 CHIKAMURA JUNE E+MASAKO 1918 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050012006 CHINN MARCUS 2017 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305910507 CLIFFORD CHRISTOPHER P CHINN SHERI J 2721 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 855700013003 COLBERT RENEE MONTLEY +LOWELL 2606 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 334040138508 CORDELL DOLLY 1606 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 889900048666 CAMP MERLE M 408 S 26TH RENTON WA 98055 334040124607 CARLSON HAROLD L 1509 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 889921022006 CHARITY MARGARET SMITH 523 S 31ST ST RENTON WA 98055 948575038005 CHEN ANDY MING 624 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 302305902108 CHENG TIETH MING 19921 HINSDALE AV TORRANCE CA 90503 855700006007 -~kt;(~ CHINN DEAN M ~QU.)(\ '3h€){~ 2414 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 302305910606 CHINN MARY JEAN 2715 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 334040136502 CLYMER STEPHEN E+ THERESA 1704 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 889921005001 COLEMAN GARY E 2807 WHITWORTH AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040138581 CORDELL GERALD A MRS 1606 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200042900 CANN ROBERT C+RENA 311 S 22ND PL RENTON WA 98055 334040138003 CASHDOLLAR DENNIS P 1612 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040117205 CHAVEZ KATHRYN G 1607 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575014006 CHEN JIAN CHENG 746 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 302305912800 CHEUNG MUI HO+CHIM KUEN KAU 420 S 33RD PL RENTON WA 98055 889921078008 CHINN DEAN MARK 9625 S 177TH ST RENTON WA 98055 302305909202 CHURCH PENNY R 3820 E VALLEY RD RENTON WA 98055 302305904500 CODER MARGIE 409 S 36TH ST RENTON WA 98055 722200018603 CONLEY KENNETH MARVIN+JOSAL 2020 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050030008 COTTAGE COURT F.w. #57022 C/O EXECUTIVE HOUSE INC 7517 GREENWOOD AV N SEATTLE WA 98103 302305911802 CSA LLC 33218 139TH TER SE AUBURN WA 98092 302305910309 DA VALLE STRADA 912510TH AV S SEATILE WA 98108 302305909004 DC PROPERTIES 3330 E VALLEY RD RENTON WA 98055 334040117007 DOMINGCIL MARYANN 1521 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575042007 DOWNING SCOTI B 600 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 948575022009 ERDMANN PAUL BREZONICK ERDMANN CARRI L 707 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 855700009001 EVERSON RANDALL L 2510 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 948575049002 FADON PAULL 637 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 302305903304 FISCHER ALVIN F 3100 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 722200041001 FORD GLEN 1925 SHATIUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 _46700025007 CUMMINGS RAYMOND+MARILYN L 2509 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTONWA 98055 889900002003 DAHLMAN DALE 403 S 26TH ST RENTON WA 98055 722200039401 DEBRUYN KAREN A 313 S 19TH ST RENTON WA 98055 886050032004 DOMINOV RESTEM 315 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98155 722200036209 DUVAL DENNIS 0 411 S 19TH ST RENTON WA 98055 334040135504 ERICKSEN GORDON Y 1718 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040334107 EVOC LLC C/O FLYNN PROPERTIES INC 225 BUSH ST SUITE 1470 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94104 507000009005 FAIRMAN NANCY M 3500 SHA TIUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200042801 FLEUERBORN MICHAEL #56941 C/O EXECUTIVE HOUSE INC 7517 GREENWOOD AV N SEATILE WA 98103 855700007005 FOUNTAIN BARRY B 2420 TALBOT CREST DR RENTON WA 98055 3050005000 CURTIS JEREMY E+JENNIFER SMART- CURTIS 308 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 886050016007 DAVIS GEORGE E+DAVIS DALIA P 671 HARRINGTON AV NE RENTON WA 98056 334040115001 DELLA ROSSA EDWIN 1625 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575036009 DONG WAYNE VINH LIEN 636 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 948575045000 EKINS DONALD E 613 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 855700023002 ESPEY DIANE 2419 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 302305907305 FACILITIES & OPERATIONS CTR OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIR 300 SW7TH ST RENTON WA 98055 989920001009 FAST JOHN L 3431 SHATIUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050034000 FLORES MARISA 327 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 302305903205 FRAIDENBURG JAMES 0 FRAIDENBURG-ANDERSON SHIRLEY 3320 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 334040118005 FRANCESCHINA TODD M 1515 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040155007 GARCIA MARINA 220 S 15TH ST RENTON WA 98055 302305901100 GILBERT MYLES G+LlNDA E 3120 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 302305911703 GOLDEN TREASURY II LLC 3700 E VALLEY RD RENTON WA 98055 889921001000 GREGORIOS EMMA G 507 S 27TH PL RENTON WA 98055 948575001003 HANLEY MARY LOU 611 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 302305909905 HAWK FAMILY EAST VALLEY LTD 22435 SE 288TH BLACK DIAMOND WA 98010 855700032003 HEM OSCAR F HEMCJ 2619 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 989920002007 -A-ikmokc.t~ HILL JAY G+DORi A-~~...r 3425 SHATIUCK AV S ~rs\LJ RENTON WA 98055 886050008004 HOBSON LEE C+MARY A DIGGS 206 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 302305911604 FULLER NATHAN C 3113 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 948575027008'-~ 5~h -w=-~\Ifo/c5"'" GARVIDA MELCHOR R+JESUSA 9929 S 168TH PL RENTON WA 98055 889921019002 GILES RICHARD B 505 S 31ST ST RENTON WA 98055 855700030007 GOLDMANN CHARLES J 2607 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 722200051208 GREGORIS ERMO 223 S 19TH ST RENTON WA 98055 722200039104 HARRIS CRAIG L 1901 SHATIUCK S RENTON WA 98055 302305905002 HAWKINS JACK M+JANE I 2825 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 889921021008 HERLEY PETER E+CYNTHIA M 517 S 31ST ST RENTON WA 98055 507000015002 HILLMAN LAWRENCE D+NANCY L 3620 SHATIUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575026000· HOGLUND WILLIAM E+HISAMI S 727 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 948575032008 GANGWISH JAMES + SHARON 700 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 334040113204 GIENG HONG 1731 LAKE SOUTH RENTON WA 98055 507000002000 GILLILAN ANNE LIVING TRUST 3615 SHATIUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305903601 GOLLIER N STEPHENIE+ TYRONE 2709 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 722200037207 GUILD-TAYLOR JONATHAN 0 1920 SHATIUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 507000006001 HARVEY RICHARD D & FRANCINE 21015 148TH AV SE KENT WA 98042 855740003006 HElM ALAN W 2125 SHATIUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305902009 HERNANDEZ JUAN F 3405 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 722200018504 HIZON JUN B+CARMELITA B 2016 SHATIUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 855700028001 HOLZBOOG DAVID S+AMY L 2527 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 \ .. 722200018306 HUATIMOTHY 907 N 199TH ST SHORELINE WA 98133 855700017004 HURST CHARLES HERMAN 2325 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 948575021001 JAEB JEROME R 701 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 948575040001 JOHNSON DALE L & NANCY G 612 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 334040124003 JONSON RAY N & JULIE A 18808 SE 170TH ST RENTON WA 98058 334040130000 KATZER MELVIN E 1725 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040132808 KENNICK MARY HELEN 1812 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 . 948575006002 KIMINKI CARL J & LINDA A . 703 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 948575055009 KING COUNTY 500 KC ADMIN BLDG 500 4TH AV SEATTLE WA 98104 722200042207 KIRKMAN DANIEL V+ TERESE I 2007 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 ::134040128004 HUGHES H H 1621 DAVIS S RENTON WA 98055 334040140603 HYRY WALTER W 211 S 15TH ST RENTON WA 98055 334040111505 JELLEY ALLEN 1805 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 889921020000 JONES GEORGE D IV 511 S31STST RENTON WA 98055 948575031000 KAMIKAWA JOSEPH A+KEIKO 706 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 302305908204 KEG RESTAURANTS LTD #150 • 10760 SHELLBRIDGE WY RICHMOND BC V6X 3H1 CANADA 722200016102 KETRON SCOTT A 2226 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575025002 KING ALBERT STEPHEN 721 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 855700016006 KINNISCHTZKE DARREN L 2319 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 948575039003 KLAAS VIRGINIA E 618 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 334040129002 HURLOCKER COLLIN P 1713 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200018405 IVANOV VICTOR+SARTOVA OKSANA 2012 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200016300 JENKINS ALAN S II+JOYA L 2215 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 889921004004 JONES PAMELA 2801 WHITWORTH AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200017506 KATZER FREDERICK & TERI 2103 TABOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 889921007007 KELLY JAMES+DAO N 2819 WHITWORTH AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050014002 KIAZIMOV ALI+JOULIA BOGACHOV 2101 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050019001 KING ALBERT WONG+L YNN WING 2115 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200042108 KIRKMAN DANIEL V 2007 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040127501 KNIGHT RONALD R&JANICE A PO BOX 6 RENTON WA 98057 722200036001 r evnP~ o-rdeI" etpl~ KOCH JEROME F+KATHLEEN A 2207 S 304TH 3\u\D6' FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 302305910705 KREBS FREDERICK 0 2703 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 302305903007 KUMP CARY+STRICKER MARY 3130 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 886050017005 LANDMARK HOMES INC 2715 64TH AV NE #B TACOMA WA 98422 302305904104 LEAVY KARIN ANN 3400 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055~5711 507000011001 LERNER VICTORIA P+JOSHUA 0 3510 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 855700015008 -NbSULh tt:- LI XUAN MO ET AL ~hlolO6" 410.S 23RD ST RENTON WA 98055 948575007000 -Mtmp+cd ~ \!-n.~i\ LOCKHART RICARDO+NATALIE M'3l16\c:b 9907 S 169TH PL RENTON WA 98058 886050013004 LUONG HINH 2023 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305902900 MACLEOD TERRANCE & KATHRYN 3124 TALBOT RD S RENTON, WA 98055 855700012005 KOYANO NOUK A 2528 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 855700008003 KUMAR KAMLESH+SAROJANI 2500 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 886050020009 L H I INVESTMENTS INC L L C POBOX 26116 FEDERAL WAY WA 98093 334040333208 LARKSPUR HOSPITALITY CO LLC C/O PROPERTY TAX DEPT #115 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE AZ 85261 948575046008 LEE DAN T +MYRNA K -TRUSTEES 619 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 948575005004 LEWIS INGA 635 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 334040131503 LlMTHOM 1813 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305905309 LOKEN CLIFFORD O+BETTY J 417 S 36TH ST RENTON WA 98055 948575010004-~~ LUU MIKE U+LlLY N t:u\'{\ 3161C6' 9919 S 169TH PL RENTON WA 98055 855700018002 MAGNO LILY 0 2331 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 886050027004 KOZAK ANDREY 316 N 21ST ST RENTON WA 98055 507000004006 KUMARAN RUDRA 3603 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575017009 LAM PIK HA THERESA 728 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 948575003009 LETHANH 0 TONNU TUNG T 623 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 989920003005 LEMAFA MOLIUILA M 3419 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055. 334040113105 LEWIS OLGA M 1717 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305907008 LITTLE FAMILY LLC 2810 EASTLAKE AV E SEATTLE WA 98102-3087 855700011007 LOMBARDI LEONARD S 2522 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98056 948575037007 MA SIMON & SARAH 75 TROWBRIDGE ST BELMONT MA 02478 302305906703 MAGNUSONCA 918 S 138TH ST SEATTLE WA 98168 886050011008 MAl JOANNE 2011 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050021007 MASLOW DAVID 2127 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040119003 MCCALLISTER GLEN A 1503 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050029000 MICU SATURNINO 2020 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575024005 MIYATAKE DAVID+VICKI L B 715 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 722200038205 MOORMAN CLAUDIA A 8238118TH AV SE RENTON WA 98056 855740001000 MOUNTRY SOMDETH 16 CLEVELAND PL UNIT #4 GLOUCESTER MA 01930 302305901209 NAKANISHI RUTH Y 3315 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 855700010009 NGUYEN HUNG DAI 2516 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 302305902504 NOBLE JANICE M 2819 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 722200039302 MALETIC STI;PHEN 325 S 19TH ST RENTON WA 98055 334040130505 MATHISEN LANCE I+NAOMI E 1801 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 855700031005 MCCLAIN CHARLIE W+ARNETTA 2613 TALBOT CREST DR RENTON WA 98055 334040127006 MILLS MARGARET S 1609 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040132105 MOLA CHRISTINE R 320 S 19TH ST RENTON WA 98055 334040131008 MORAN PATRICK J+MONICA L 1805 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305912008 MULLINS JOY 1602196TH ST E SPANAWAY WA 98387 855700027003 NESS ROSEMARY 2521 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 855700021006 NGUYEN KIM ANH LE 2407 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 334040111 000-~ dell JfKlJ.,b\~ ~ NU WEST INC ~E(p 3il~~ 1900 112TH AV NE SUITE 101 BELLEVUE WA 98004 886050018003 MARTIN ROBERT P & NIDA B 2111DAVISAVS RENTON WA 98055 722200039203 MC DOWELL JAMES G 1909 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050007006-l\Ib\-del;~tt 0...& MCDONALD MAX ~ser:f 3lJlp/cb 19125 3RD AV NW SEATTLE WA 98177 948575051008 MITCHELL STANLEY E 3107 SMITHERS AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040113006 MONTANEZ CHERIE D+MEDILO BENJIE P 1737 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 507000007009 MOSS CHARLES D+KATHERINE E 3509 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 889921077000 MUNOZ REMIGLO R'& MATILDE B 2709 WHITWORTH AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575020003 NGUYEN HUAN D 706 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 722200040003 NIEMI T L+NANCY M 1917 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050015009 O'STEEN JONAKAN H 2107 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 855700001008 OLIN DALE L 2320 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 3023059101.01 OLYMPIC PIPELINE COMPANY C/O BP AMERICA INC PO BOX 5015 BUENA PARK CA 90622 948575023007 PELAYO ALFONSO G 711 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 334040140702 PEREA JOE 217 S 15TH ST RENTON WA 98055 948575016001 PERTEET RICHARD L+DAVIDSON CHERRYLL 734 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 302305902702 PIEROTTI FAMILY PARTNERSHIP 16113 SE 170TH PL RENTON WA 98058 334040116504 POZZOBO'N TERESA & EDA 1615 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575048004 RAMACCIOTTI CHRISTOPHER DAV 631 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 889921008005 RANOLA CLEOFE R 2825 WHITWORTH AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575002001 RITALA KEITH E 617 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 302305901803 OLSON SHAWN & JAIME 3101 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 889921024002 PARK JOON H & JAE EUN 607 S 31ST ST RENTON WA 98055 302305912206 PENA ELMER C+EVEL YN D 3021 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 302305903700 PEREZ DEOFAVENTE C+SUSANA 41636TH RENTON WA 98055 948575015003 PHAM BANGC 740 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 507000003008 PONDER THOMAS L & SYLVIA M 3609 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 885767010006 PUBL HOSP DISTR#1 KING CO VALLEY MED ATTN FINANCE POBOX 50010 ' RENTON WA 98058 302305912701 RAMIREZ RENE Q+DANILEE 426 S 33RD PL RENTON WA 98055 507000018006 REMY JOHNJ 408 S 37TH ST RENTON WA 98055 334040139001 ROBBINS CAROL 17207 NE 7TH PL BELLEVUE WA 98008 889900006004 OLSON SUELL YN N 2702 SHATTUCK CT S RENTON WA 98055 889921081002 PARK VICTORIA HOMEOWNERS PO BOX 1104 RENTON WA 98055 722200041209 -'ite:f\l...mec/·31.qj,o~ PENALOZA WILLIAM 2003 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 889921076002 PERRI ANGELA M 2702 WHITWORTH AV S RENTON WA 98055 855700022004 PICKREIGN CYNTHIA J 2413 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 948575047006 POOLE DEBORAH J 625 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 334040126503 RADFORD KATHRINE S+PIRES MICHAEL A 1603 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 855700002006 RANKIN ANTHONY R 2323 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 334040132501 RINGER OS PO BOX 13471 DES MOINES WA 98198 889900003001 ROBERTS MARION J+KIMBERLY F 409 S 26TH ST RENTON WA 98055 886050028002 ROBINSON ANN M 310 S 21ST ST RENTON WA 98055 334040155502 ROSA RAYMOND P+ADA A 307 S 19TH RENTON WA 98055 889921079006 SAELEE KAO MENG+NGING LIN 500 S 27TH PL RENTON WA 98055 302305910408 SCC PROPERTY HOLDINGS C/O PTA LLC SHUR #48010 PO BOX 900933 SEATTLE WA 98109 302305901605 SCHUL TEK JEFF & BERNADINE 2921 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 886050031006 SEIFERT KATHRYN L 307 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 334040000609 SHURGARD STORAGE CENTERS SHUR #48019 PO BOX 900933 SEATTLE WA 98109 302305911406 SMITH ARTHUR L & MARIE W PO BOX 59512 RENTON WA 98058 948575052006 SMITH WILLIAM E+ANDREA L 3111 SMITHERS AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050010000 SPICA PROPERTIES INC C/O EASTER SAVINGS BANK 11350 MCCORMICK RD STE #200 HUNT VALLEY MD 21031 334040125505 ROBINSON BRIAN+SUSAN M 1521 DAVIS AVE S RENTON WA 98055 889921006009 RUMEL RYAN R 2813 WHITWORTH AV S RENTON WA 98178 302305905507 SANTUARIO JUAN CARLOS+CORONA ROSA 411 S 36TH ST RENTON WA 98055 302305908105 SCHNEIDER KATHLEEN E 3037 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 886050001009 SEBAK JEFFREY T 332 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 722200042702 SENG KIMSON ET AL 323 S 22ND PL RENTON WA 98055 886050002007 SIDHU BANT S & BALWINDER K SIDHU JASWINDER 326 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 889900001005 SMITH DONC 401 S 26TH RENTON WA 98055 855700020008 SMITH-SAIZ STEPHANIE HOPE 2401 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 302305911109 SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES C/O DENNIS KINCH POBOX 978 MERCER ISLAND WA 855700004002 ROBINSON KIMBERLY M 2402 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 334040137005 RUNDQUIST JOANN 1628 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200018009 SAUNDERS ALICE C 2009 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 334040117106 SCHNEIDER SHAWN M+KATRINA M 1523 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 722200037009 SEBELIST MARGARET A 1940 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305907800 SHELTON DARRELL J+JULIE A 3411 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 889921003006 SINGH PARAMJIT +KAUR HARDIP 2715 WHITWORTH AV S RENTON WA 98055 889900005006 SMITH MARCIA A 2607 SHATTUCK CT S RENTON WA 98055 334040125000 SORENSON PAUL W+SORENSON CONNIE LEE 27006 SE 407TH ENUMCLAW WA 98022 889921068009 STEDNICK DANIEL W 515 S 28TH PL RENTON WA 98055 334040128509 STEMMLER JERRIL YN E 1.707 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 886050033002 TAN LEAKHENA 321 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 948575053004 THANH NGUYEN DELON TUAN 3117 SMITHERS AV S RENTON WA 98055 334040137500 THEODOROU PETER ET AL 1622 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 855700005009 THOMAS GEORGE E 9930 BEACON AV SEATTLE WA 98055 334040133004 THURBER ERIC S+ROBIN S 1808 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575028006 TOMAS CAROL P+JESS L 739 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 948575035001 TOYE GEORGE & WINNIE 100 W SQUANTUM ST #316 N QUINCY MA 02171 855740003501 TRANTUAN 2135 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575011002 TRUONGTHI 729 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 886050024001 STEWART 329 SOUTH 21 ST ST RENTON WA 98056 302305901902 TATRO DON L 3211 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 302305902801 THAYER ELLA PAULINE 3112 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 886050009002 THOENNES NICHOLAS A 200 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 334040132006 THOMPSON MELANIE A 1819 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575009006 TIMM ROBERT L 719 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 886050023003 -Mc\(t$ Wllu\~'r"'\ TON ANH ~r'\ ttl ~ 335 S 21ST ST 3)z.t1~ RENTON WA 98055 302305906307 -A{kmp·\-ed nct TRAN KEVIN ~(\ 2>lIu\t6"' 3001 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 855700029009 TRAUTMANN JOHN F 2601 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 302305907503 TURNER DAVID E & JODIE D 3107 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 886050004003 STOKER ROBERT W 314 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 334040129507 TEGANTVOORT VICTOR 1717 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305902884 THAYER EUGENE 3112 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 507000017008 THOMAN STEPHANIE 404 S 37TH ST RENTON WA 98055 948575019005 THORNTON MS 712 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 334040115100 TOBACCO JANA A 1701 LAKE AV S RENTON WA 98055 855700026005 TONSGARD PATRICIA L 2515 TALBOT CREST DR RENTON WA 98055 302305912107 TRAN THANH VAN+THU HA NGUYEN ET ALTHI 3011 TALBOT ROAD SO RENTON WA 98055 948575050000 TRUONG BRUCE G+DARAND RHODO 3101 SMITHERS AV S RENTON WA 98055 989920005000 TURNER TAMARA 3426 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305910804 UC & D INC 4121 15TH AV S SEATTLE WA 98108 334040114004 VILLA CHARLES A+CONSTANCE M 1717 LAKE AVE S RENTON WA 98055 886050003005 WADE DAVID R 320 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 722200039005 WALLEM DANIEL RAY 319 S 19TH ST RENTON WA 98055 855700019000 WEMMERS GERTRUDE S 2337 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 886050022005 -~~ IeH-NQ WHITE JUSTICE MUU~ 3\\~ 2133 DAVIS AV S RENTON WA 98055 855740001505 WILLIAMS DON D 2111 SHATTUCK PL S RENTON WA 98055 948575056007 WINSPER COMM ORGANIZATION 16835101ST PL S E RENTON WA 98055 855700014001 WOLSTED WILLIAM 407 S 23 RD ST RENTON WA 98055 302305903908 WOOD DOROTHY M 3300 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 8~6050035007 VALLEY VUE ESTATES HOMEOWNER ASSOC 332 S 20TH PL RENTON WA 98055 302305903106 VRABLICK VERNAL 3330 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 334040140504 .-RettJ\JV'l\ tt ~ ..... WAHL SCOTT G & LINDA B 1508 LAKE AV S _I 1"1- RENTON WA 98055 ;:51"2.1 uo 948575004007 WALLIN RONALD L 629 S 32ND ST RENTON WA 98055 722200037306 WHALE JAMES A 1922 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 948575054002 -~O 5\.l£h #- WICKS BRUCE A+SHARON K 16851 99TH AV S R-e.tv-mto~ RENTON WA 98055 =3\UIc6 855700003004 WILLIAMS ISAIAH D+VELECIA M 2332 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 948575057005 WINSPER COMM ORGANIZATION 3125 WELLS AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305912909 WONG WING TIN 5537 17TH AV S SEATTLE WA 98108 948575029004 YAMASHITA MARK K+MARLENE H 716 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 507000016000 VICTOR B 400 S 37TH RENTON WA 98055 948575043005 VUONGTHAOT 601 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 948575008008 -NO suq.,iF-311 ~l 06"" WALKER JOSEPH B+CAROL G 9911 S 169TH PL RENTON WA 98055 302305909301 WEBB B DOUGLAS & BARBARA J 10319 SE 30TH ST BELLEVUE WA 98004 889921023004 WHITE CRAIG A SR+MARIA A WO 10823 2ND SW SEATTLE WA 98146 855700024000 WILLIAMS BARTOW JR+MINNIE L 2503 TALBOT CREST DR S RENTON WA 98055 302305904302 WILSON PETER HARRISON 24333 35TH AV S KENT WA 98032 855740002503 WINSTEAD JAMES A 2115 SHATTUCK AV S RENTON WA 98055 302305912305 WOO PETERC 3031 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 948575018007 YAN CHUN-HUNG PO BOX 14360 SEATTLE WA 98114 302305913006 YANWIN PO BOX 27470 SEAITLE WA 98125 886050026006 YOON YOUNGJ 322 S 21ST ST RENTON WA 98055 948575012000 YUEN SHANG YEN+DIANA 731 S032ND ST RENTON WA 98055 855740002008 YARDY CRAIG A 2105 SHAITUCK PL S RENTON WA 98055 948575044003--Nc s~h#-3lt(PJo5"" YORITA BRIAN G+CHERIE D 9812 S 168TH PL RENTON WA 98055 889900049004 YEAGER LESLIE M 400 S 26TH ST RENTON WA 98055 302305908501 YOUNKER R 1410 102ND AV NE BELLEVUE WA 98005 Date: To: From: March 8, 2005 CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM Allen Quynn, Utilities /:.,. .£ Susan Fiala, Development Planning ~ f" $ubject: Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 LUA05-022, ECF The Development Planning Section of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on March 29, 2005. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me, at 430-7382 if you have any questions. / City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT fEB 1. 4 7.00S RECE\VED MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: City of Renton PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: ADDRESS: 1055 South Grady Way Mosquito Abatement Program (2005 -2009) CITY: Renton, WA ZIP: 98055 PROJECT/ADDRESS(S}/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: The treatment area is bounded by SR-167 to the west, TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425-430-7247 Talbot Rd., Talbot Crest Dr., Lake Ave. S., Davis Ave. S. to the east, the SR-16711-405 interchange to the north APPLICANT (if other than owner) and the Valley Medical Center to the south. KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): NAME: See attached COMPANY (if applicable): EXISTING LAND USE(S): Single family residence, open space and vacant land. ADDRESS: PROPOSED LAND USE(S}: NI A CITY: ZIP: EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: TELEPHONE NUMBER RLDandRSF PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION . CONTACT PERSON (if applicable): N/A NAME: AllenQuynn EXISTING ZONING: R-l Residential, R-8 Residential COMPANY (if applicable): PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): NI A SITE AREA (in square feet): The project (treatment) area ADDRESS: 1055 South Grady Way covers the upland hillside (approximately 60 acres) east ofSR-167 uphill from the Panther Creek Wetlands. CITY: Renton, WA ZIP: 98055 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING THREE LOTS OR MORE (if applicable): N/A TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: 425-430-7247, aquynn@cLrenton.wa.us PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): N/A Pk~JECT INFORMATION conb .. .Jed NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): NI A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): N/A NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): NI A PROJECT VALUE: $20,000 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A o FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL • GEOLOGIC HAZARD (seismic) 60 acres sq. ft. BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A o HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL o SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES sq. ft. BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if o WETLANDS sq. ft. applicable): NI A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included) The project area is adjacent to and upland of the eastern edge of the Panther Creek Wetlands generally located between SR-167 on the west and Lake Avenue SouthlTalbot Road South on the east and extending from SW 43rd Street on the south to 1-405 on the north, within the City of Renton, Washington. The entire project is within the southeast quarter of Section 19 and the east half(J12) of Section 24, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. Environmental Review 3. 2. 4. Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ 400 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) Allen Quynn , declare that I am (please check one) _ the current owner of the property involved in this application or X the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that I\S N signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her heir free and voluntary ac for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary Public in and for the H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\masterapp.doc\AQtp 02114/05 'PROJECT INFORMATION (continued) "' ...... ,''''',' (Signature of owner/Repres;.'!p~~ J. pli'\", --9;-«) ......... ~ " ff ~ ... ~~S\ON i~;; .. -:";"I, .: .~ T ~. ~ : ':"0 ~O A~y ~\ ~ ~ :<J (I): ~ "'-. -..-. '" ~ : : ~ ~ (f) ... PUBUG :' ~ ~ ';.A' '0" ~., •• , :1 .'~': ' •. r;.:·. 0'19.0 .... r... .: "" .... ' ........... ~~v_- "" Or: WAS-r. ......... -'\\\'''''''', .... .. My appointment expires: __ I_c::::::,_*t_l.::....~-'-...... I_~_"7-+-__ H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\masterapp.doc\AQtp 02/14/05 3340401195 3340401190 3340401185 3340400995 3340401180 3340401170 3340401010 3340401171 3340401172 3340401165 3340401160 3340401150 3340401151 3340401145 3340401140 3340401020 3340401065 3340401131 3340401132 3340401130 3340401133 3340401125 3340401120 3340401115 3340401076 3340401075 3340401110 1923059016 7222000511 7222000410 8860500090 8860500080 8860500100 8860500110 8860500120 8860500130 8860500140 8860500150 8860500170 8860500160 8860500180 8860500190 8860500200 8860500210 8860500220 8860500350 8860506666 3023059002 3023059076 8557000170 Property Identification Listing (PID) 8557000180 8557000190 8557000200 8557000210 8557000220 8557000230 8557000240 8557000250 8557000260 8557000270 8557000280 8557000290 8557000300 3023059107 3023059036 3023059106 3023059003 3023059105 3023059025 3023059125 3023059050 3023059126 3023059016 3023059004 3023059063 3023059121 3023059123 3023059122 3023059081 3023059075 3023059018 3023059116 3023059119 3023059114 3023059115 3023059019 3023059062 3023059068 3023059130 3023059129 3023059128 3023059127 3023059012 3023059124 9899200010 9899200020 9899200030 9899200040 3023059026 5070000080 5070000070 5070000060 DEV~~~~WEwt~ING FEB 2 4 2005 RECe.'VEU 5070000050 5070000040 5070000030 5070000020 5070000010 The project may only. be conducted on City property and on those privately owned parcels listed above for which authorization has been received from the property owner or owner's legal representative. ·~PLANN\NG DEV~~~~~~ENTON fEB 2 It 2005 . RECEr~EU PROJECT NARRATIVE Project name: Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 Size and location of the project: The project area is adjacent to and upland of the eastern edge of the Panther Creek Wetland generally located between SR-167 on the west and Lake Avenue SouthlTalbot Road South on the east and extending from SW 43rd Street on the south to 1-405 on the north, within the City of Renton, Washington. The project area covers approximately 60 acres to the east of the approximately 65-acre Panther Creek Wetlands complex. The entire project is within the southeast quarter of Section 19 and the east half of Section 24, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, in King County, Washington. Project background: The City of Renton initiated the Mosquito Abatement Program in the Talbot Hill area near the Panther Creek Wetlands. The program was initially administered by the Parks Department, in the mid-1970's in response to complaints received from residents living adjacent to the wetlands. The Panther Creek Wetlands is a 65-acre complex located in the City of Renton east of State Route 167, west of Talbot Road, north of SW 43rd Street, and south of Interstate 405. Early treatments included methods such as aerial sprayings. However, increasing environmental information available in the mid-1980's led to the consideration of a program that balanced both citizens' demand for a Mosquito Abatement Program and environmental regulations and concerns. Under continued citizen. advocacy for mosquito control, the City applied for a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination for a five-year program (1989-1993). A Determination of Non-Significance was issued by the City of Renton and upheld by the Hearing Examiner following. an appeal of the determination. The determination specified methods and types of treatment and monitoring, requirements for notification to citizens and agencies, and provisions for reconsideration of the suitability of the proposed treatment. The Examiner condition for the program required that a wildlife census be conducted prior to treatment of the wetlands each year. The mosquito control treatment methods used from 1989-1993 consisted of a land treatment and a water treatment. The water treatment utilized a biological insecticide called Altosid (methoprene) in dissolvable briquette form placed in the water once or twice a season to prevent mosquito larva from maturing into adults by inhibiting their growth. The land treatment utilized an insecticide spray called Scourge® for the control of adult mosquitoes and was typically conducted May through the mosquito season (July/August). The 1989-1993 Mosquito Abatement Program was administered according to the program requirements of the SEPA determination and Hearing Examiner. In 1990, the program administration was' transferred to the Surface Water Utility, which has since managed the program. In 1994, the City applied for a SEPA determination for a land treatment (spraying) program during June 1994 -August 1994 utilizing the synthetic pyrethroid products ~~0tJlING Permanone® 31-66. A Determination of Non-Significance was issued by the City Bflf{~~iOrr' , FEB 2 4 2005 RIECE~VEU '" Mosquito Abatement Program 2000-2004 Project Narrative Page 2 (File No. LUA-94-066, ECF) for the proposed program which was then implemented in accordance with the SEPA proposal and determination. Trapping of mosquitoes was conducted on a weekly basis during each period of treatment from 1991 to 1993, using light traps strategically located in the hillside area east of the Panther Creek Wetlands. The number and species of mosquitoes collected in the light traps were identified and recorded. The following four species were typically collected: Aedes, Coquillettidia, Culex, and Culiseta. Mosquito populations, although different from year-to-year, are shown by the trapping results to be recurring. A wildlife census was also conducted each year in accordance with the Hearing Examiner's decision dated May 31, 1989. Continued recurrence of mosquito populations in the Talbot Hill area near the Panther Creek Wetland resulted in citizen requests for continued mosquito control efforts. In order to provide relief from the nuisance and discomfort caused by the mosquitoes, the Surface Water Utility applied for and was granted a 5-year SEPA determination of non-significance-mitigated. The program, similar to the 1994 program, was conducted from April 1995 to September 1999. The Surface Water Utility again applied for a 5-year SEPA determination to continue the program through to"2004. Permanone® 31-66 was replaced with BIOMIST® (Same chemical formulation but different trade name) and the use of Scourge® was discontinued. This was because Permanone® 31-66 was found to be much more effective then Scourge® in controlling mosquito populations and can be applied at a much lower concentration minimizing environmental impacts. Also, for the program years 2003 and 2004, a new product trade named Kontrol 4-4® was used in conjunction with BIOMIST®. Both products have the same ingredients are applied at the same concentrations. With the expiration of the 2000 to 2004 SEPA determination, the Surface Water Utility is applying for another 5-year SEPA (April 2005 -September 2009). The proposed program for abatement of mosquitoes in the area adjacent to and the upland area of the Panther Creek Wetlands will be very similar to the program conducted in 2000-2004 (File No. LUA-00-025, ECF). It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (ULV) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack- mounted, portable blower . .: The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week generally during the months of May through August when mosquito populations are typically higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas away from water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditions allow and in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements. Information on the characteristics of BIOMIST® and directions for its use are contained in Exhibit A. Both BIOMIST® and Kontrol 4-4® are insecticides that contain a synthetic version of permethrin as its active ingredient. These insecticides are formulated for dilution with oil products, such as mineral oil, and are to be applied at a rate between 0.0035 and 0.0070 pounds of permethrin per acre. BIOMIST® and Kontrol 4-4® degrade in soil and breaks down more slowly (24-48 hours) when compared to Scourge® (breaks down in a few hours), making it more effective in controlling mosquito populations. BIOMIST® and Kontrol 4-4® are the preferred insecticide because of their greater effectiveness. However, they are not to ~tANNING applied within 100 feet of water. DEV1h~~?WENTON H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 05 Program\SEPA\project narrative.doc\AQtp FEB 2 4 20 RECE~VED Mosquito Abatement Program 2000-2004 Project Narrative Page 3 Permethrin is not on the list of pesticides with active ingredients named in the lawsuit filed against EPA by the Washington Toxics Coalition. The court ruling required that buffer zones be imposed on the specific pesticide that may be applied near water because of the potential impacts to salmon. The complete list can be found in Exhibit B. Current use of the project site and adjacent properties: The current use of the project area is largely undeveloped, forested land. Low density and single-family residential border the project site to the east. The undeveloped, open/forested Panther Creek Wetlands borders the project treatment area to the west. Vacant, forested land borders the project area on the south and 1-405 borders the site on the north. Proposed schedule and timing: The schedule for the proposed spraying program for the abatement of mosquitoes in the area adjacent to and the upland area of the Panther Creek Wetlands is typically from May through August each year of the proposed five-year program. The treatments may be conducted in earlier or later months if mosquito populations are at high enough levels to warrant treatment. The spraying will only be conducted at a maximum frequency of twice per week, between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM. Following each treatment, the applicator will provide the City a brief summary of the area treated and the type of chemical used (BIOMIST®/Kontrol 4-4®) , weather conditions during the treatment application, the time during which treatment was conducted, an estimate of the relative abundance and distribution of mosquitoes, and a recommendation on the scope and timing of subsequent treatment. City staff will conduct on-site monitoring of the treatment applications periodically. Mitigation: • In order to ensure the public health and safety, the City will: 1) provide written information which fully describes the proposed abatement program and schedule to all property owners within the proposed project area; 2) conduct the program only on City property and on those privately owned parcels for which authorization has been received from the property owner or the owner's legal representative; 3) post a description and schedule of the program at regular intervals in the vicinity of the project area. The information will include the name and telephone number of a City representative who can provide further information about the program to interested parties. • The insecticide spraying must be conducted in upland areas away from water areas and homes by a licensed applicator in accordance with EPA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act or FIFRA) and Department of Agriculture (WAC-16-228) approved application requirements. • To prevent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift into the Panther Creek Wetlands, application may only be made as conditions permit in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above which treatment may not be conducted. Wind speeds determined by the applicator at the time of treatment must be 1 0 ~~EP~m PLANNING DEV CITY OF RENTON H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement pr'te~04 2005 Program\SEPA\project narrative.doc\AQtp RECEIVED Mosquito Abatement Program 2000-2004 Project Narrative Page 4 hour or less and must be blowing in an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek Wetlands or the treatment may not be conducted. • Equipment wash-down water is to be disposed of off-site in accordance with EPA and Department of· Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface or ground water. • Accidental spills are to be reported immediately by the applicator to the City of Renton, King County Department of Health, the State Department of Health, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Ecology (spills in water). Appropriate measures are to be immediately implemented by the applicator to first contain and then to clean up the spill in accordance with Department of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requirements. Because only small quantities (see Section B.7.a.1 of the Environmental Checklist) of the proposed insecticide will be on the project site, the quantity of insecticide that may spill is anticipated to pose little impact. • The applicator will immediately notify the City of Renton and stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement program. No animal kill is expected because BIOMIST®/Kontrol 4-4®, when used according to the manufacturer's instructions as approved by EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. Ni pv.t,U-1\t-la OE\lELOPNlO~ RENiON C\1"f fEB '2. ~ 1~~5 H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abateme~a~\tEO Program\SEPA\project narrative.doc\AQtp ~ <t: ~ 1--1 co ~ ~ BIOMIST® 4+12 ULV .CLARKE For Application Only By Public Health Officials and Trained Personnel of Mosquito Abatement Districts and Other Mosquito Control Programs. An All Temperature, Quick Knockdown, Low Odor, Non-Corrosive, Synthetic Pyrethroid for Control of Adult Mosquitoes in Residential and Recreational Areas. Also For Use Against Biting and Non-Biting Midges and Blackflies. Precautionary Statements HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS CAUTION H;;'mful II swallowed or abs·):l>ed illIough skin. Avoid contact wilh skin. eyes o· dOlhng May cause con:.cl senSilizaliOn fOllowing repe31ed contact with Skin in susceptible individuals. Wa$h 1.~crOlJyld~ ;'lIer handling. Avoid tJrr.alhino 01 misT. Do nor cortamOlate toOd or leed products. STATEMENT OF PRACTICAL TREATMENT II SW;llic,wef1 Call il phvslclarl or POison Conlrol Centel ilnlnedlalely Gastric lavage is "'ClC.1lc,111 mateflal was laken ,nternally. DO NOT INDUCE VDMIlING. Vomlling may ClltlS~ asr:tr,"tllon prcumonla. 1II,'h.11 .. ,1 Remove ·"ctlm to Iresh arr Apply a,I,Ioc,al re~plralron il Indicated II 0" S."I R~rnllvft cont~m"'aled clothing and wash affected areas With soap and ·N.'~l\1 11.1 Fy~s Flllsil eve, ""Ih llleniv nl watel Gel medical allention il irritation !lersists. ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS This product is extremely loxic to lish and aquatic invertebrates. Do not apply direct- ty, to wate~. 10 areas where surface water is present or to Intertidal areas below Ihe ACTIVE INGREDIENTS: Permelhrin t3'Phenoxyphenyl)melhyl It) cis. Irans·3-12.2·dichloretheny')·2.2·dimethyl· cyclopropanecarboxylale............... ... 4.00· ... wlw Technical Piperonyl Buloxide .......... . . .. .. 12.00~~ INERT INGREDIENTS ...... '" . " ............. ~OO· ... _ 100.00·.~w Iw Contains petroleum distillates. Conlains 0.3 pounds 01 Permelhrin and 0.9 pounds of Plperonyl Butoxide per gallon CAUTION mean high water mark. Do nol apply when weather condltlons laver drift'mm trealed areas. Drift and runol! from treated areas may be hazardous to aquatic organisms In,., . neig·nboring areas. Do not allow spray Ireatment 10 drift on pastureland. qoplan!lf ! ... ~ i: poultry ranges or water supplies. Do not contaminate water when disposlrip:C~llquil{~. ~~ ment washwaters.:.·.,.. .j,~\...~!t. .... ~ PHYSICAL OR CHEMIC~LHA.~~f.tpS"':~>"'~,,~~ ii.~ 000101 "'" or slore near teat ur open lIame. FlBShpolnt mrn,~m1JN.zo··Ff~. 't~~~ '~:'t. DIRECTIONS~91:1 .. :tJ$E::~·\::!.t<;~. '-bf, <~ CLARKE MOSQUITO CONTROL 1115 a vlolaUon 01 Federal Lilw to use thl. prOch~t'~ ~iinn.rI~n".lent PRODUCTS INC with Its' labeling. .. 'l.'J •. ) .. , • ·"~J~#~~.""'~i;·" •. " 159 N. GARDEN AVENUE CONDITIONS and R~TES to USE ROSELLE. ILLINOIS 60172 for MOSQUITO CONTROL Pe,melh,in/P80 AppUcallon Ral .. Fl. 0'. 810m'" -4' 1 2 pauf\d./acre FI.oz.lM'n. per acre SMPH 10MPH lSMPH 0007;002' 9.0 18.0 27.0 3D o 0035rO 0'05 4.5 9.0 13.5 IS ooomio 00525 225 4.5 6.75 0.75 Do nOI appl~ thiS prOduct wi,hin '00 leet (30 melers) 01 lakes and streams. RIOMIS J .. 4,'t2 Ul v is recommended lOr apDhcation as an ultra low volume (U.L.V.1 IWHllel 111'" ;terosol (cold logllo conlrol adult mosquiloes in residenllal and recrea· !llloal ,t! • .1~ wh~r e Ihese lO~ecls are a prOblem. For besl resulls treat when mosqulloes .H'~ mllsr ~l\lVC alln wcathcl conoili0l15 are conducive 10 keepmg Ihe log close to the 'I' ,1111.<1. "9 r.(lnl tp.mper;lIurp.s and wind speed pot greater lIlan 10 mpll. Apptication II"''''!I I~r cool hOlf'S 01 the nighl or early morning is usually prelerable. Repeal 1",.1:"",,,1 ~s I>p.;!de,' Cnlhult Ihe previOUS :narl for application rales. E.P.A. EST. No. 83291L01 EPA. Reg. No. 8329-34 NET CONTENTS 2.5 GALS. LOT NO •. ______________ __ NOTICE: Seller makes nD warranty. expressed or implied concern· ing Ihe use of thiS product olher Ihan indica fed on the label. Buyer assumes all risk GI use and/or handling 01 this material wlten use and lor handling is conlrary to label instructio'\5. U.L.V. Nonlhermaf Ae rollO I (Cold Fog) Application: To conrrol Mosquitoes. Midges and Blackflies. apply 810MIST' •• 12 ULV using any slandard U.l.V. ground applicator capable 01 producing a nonlhermal aerosol spray with droplets ranging in slzetrom 510 30 micronsand a mass median dlamaler IMMDI 01 'Oto 20 microns Apply Ihe producl undiluled ata Ilowlale 014.510 18.00 fluidounces per minule al an average vehicle speed of 10 mph. If a dillerent vehicle speed is used. adlust rate aCCordingly isee previous chartl. These rates ale equivalent 10 .0017 to .007 pounds 01 Permelh'ln and .005 to .021 pounds of Piperonyl Bulo.ide per acre. Vary flow rate according to vegelatlon densily and mosquito populalion. Use lIigher flow rale In heavy vegelahon Or when populations are hig~. An accurale lIow meIer musf be used 10 ensure Ihe proper lIow ralc. For proper application. mount the fog applicator so thaI the nozzle is at leasl4'1/ feet above ground levld directed oullhe back 01 the venicle. Failure 10 !ollow Ihe above direJ:i.i08!ili1h1y· It in reduced ellectiveness Aerial applications should be done by ~al. . eQuipmenl capa~le 01 prodUCing droplets with ttmore Ihan2.So.;,uceecinfj tQOmicrons. Ftow rale \¢~Chi~v~.O lIuid ounces of BIOMIST -4.'12 UL V Wlrrd1rIMc than 10 MPH Do nol apply dtreclly 10 I except i n emergency sihJalt01S and with 111£ nAn ........ n. 01 Agricullure ar.d Consumer Services. 00 nOI contaminale water. food or feee by Slorage or disposal. PESTICIDE STORAGE AND SPILL PROCEDURES: Sioreupright alioom temperalure. Avoid exposure 10 e.lleme lelnperalures.ln cascofsptll ollea~ag!. soak up with an abscrbent malerial such as sand. sawdust. earlh. luller·5 earlh elc. Dispose 01 wilh Chemical wasle. PESTICIDE DISPOSAL: Wasles relulling Irom the use 01 this product m~y De disposed 01 on site or an approved waste di!posal facility. CONTAINER DISPOSAL: Triple rinse for eQuiV31enllihen o;ler lor recycling or reconditioning. Dr punClure and dispose 01 ir' a sanitary landfill. .or by othel approved state and local procedures. CONTAINERS' ONE GALLON AND SMALLER: Do nOI reuse container. Wr ap conlalners in several layers 01 newspaper and discard in trash. CONTAINERS LARGER THAN ONE GALLON: Melal Containers-Triple rinse or equivalent. Then ofter lor recycling or recondlliDning. or puncture and dispose 01 in a sanitary landfill. or by other plocedures approved by Slale and local aulhorities. Plaslic Containers-Triple rinse orequivalenl. Then oller lor recycling or reconditioning. or punclure and dispose 01 in a sanitary landlill. or by incineration. or il ailoilled by state and IDtal al!lhorilies. by burningJ.! burned. stay out of smoke. Then dispose 01 in a sanilary 1~lill or by olher aD"o"i.:Ci'»ed Slale and local IN CASE OF EMEAGENCY. CALL INFO EXHIBITB PESTICIDES SUBJECT TO BUFFER ZONES IN WASHINGTON STATE Pesticide/ESA Effects Determinations Listed by Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU)1 r~>--'-~1itf"M!'~,i~ b:11-*<0~ Y';:,o~kd:h;{~J~ Buffers required -"may affect" determination or no determination made to date No buffers -"no effect" or "may, but not likely to adversely affect" detennlnation Click on the waterbody name for a specific ESU in'the following lable to view a delailed map In Adobe Acrobat PDF Formal, The maps, produced by NOAA Fisheries, show the ESU geogpraphlc boundaries. WSDA has developed county-specific maps to identify salmon-bearing streams within the ESUs and provided a list of exceptions to the buffer.; required by the final ruling In Washington Toxles Coalition, et aI., v. EPA The effects detennination analysis end supporting documentation for each active ingredient may be viewed at epa.gov/oPDfead1/endanger/effec1sl. Chum Active Ingredient Information Chum Sleelh •• d Sleelhood Chinook Sleelhood Soci<oyo Chinook , An EvOlutionarily Significant UnU or "ESU" is a distlnctlve group of Pacific salmon or steelhead. 2 "No effect" determination based on crop use of 2,4-0. When used to control aquatic weeds, 2, 4-0 "may effect" all ESUs. 3 Only high application rale crops with use during the winter or late winter seasons (peaches, filberts and walnuts) exceed levels of concem. Dluron use on other crops win have no effect on listed salmon and steelhead. • There Is beHeved to be a large amount of dluron use on rights-of-way and other non-crop sUes In Washington. The "may effect" determination Is based on the high labal application rates, the potential direct and indirect effects of dluron at high rates, and the uncertainty of exposure. .. \ \ NG t{l" plAt-k. OE\jEL~~ RENiON CI \ 1 fl.age 1 rEe tt\ 1n\)~ 12/23104 WSDA Endangered Species Program R\~}Ce.\"tO PESTICIDES SUBJECT TO BUFFER ZONES IN WASHINGTON STATE Pesticide/ESA Effects Determinations Listed by Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU)1 EXHIBITB No buffers· "no effect" or "may, but not likely to adversely affect" determination Click on the waterbody name for a specffic ESU In the following table to view a detailed map In Adobe Acrobat PDF Formal. The maps, produced by NOM Fisheries, show the ESU geogpraphlc boundaries. WSDA has developed county·specffic maps to Identify salmon-bearing streams within the ESUs and provided a list of exceptions to the buffers required by the final ruling In Washington Taxies Coalition, et aI., v. EPA. The effects determination analysis and supporting documentation for each active ingredient may be viewed at eoa.govloDPfead1/endanger/effectsl. Acttye Ingredient Information ChUm Staelh •• d Staelhaad Chinook Steelhaad Sockaye Chinook • Home owner uses make up 8 large portion of the non-crop malathion use. However, few states lrack home owner use data and many labels do numeric application rates and/or Intervals. The "may effect" determination for non-crop use Is based on concern from horne owner use. 12123104 WSDA Endangered Species Program Neighborhood Detail Map/~lte Plan en cv > « S 1 th St W SW 21st SW 27th St SW 2 th S SW 4th St ~=====~~~ Note: TREATMENT WILL NOT BE APPLIED WITHIN 100' OF WATER. TREATMENTS WILL NOT BE PERFORMED NEAR HOMES. TREATMENT WILL ONLY BE DONE ON THE UPLAND AREA BETWEEN THE WETLAND EASTERN EDGE AND THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS. PROPERTY OWNER APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO TREATMENT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. Mosquito Abatement Program (2005-2009) / DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section 4. Development Planning Section PROJECT NAME: 11a~~2&O~ DATE: _Z,-I-/..I..-fu-tI--:;,.t}-lL5: ___ _ r f Q:\WEB\Pw\DEVSERv\Forms\Planning\waiver.xls EVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Wireless: Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites 2AND3 Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3 Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND 3 Map of View Area 2 AND 3 Photosimulations 2 AND 3 This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section DATE: 4. Development Planning Section Q;\WEB\Pw\DEVSERv\Forms\Planning\waiver.xls Neighborhood Detail Map/Site Plan SW Vl Q) > « <:J Oth St Vl Q! > « -0 C :::::; ... ~ ~ SW 21st St \i SW 27th St \} ~ !l g ~ ~ "7 Note: TREATMENT WILL NOT BE APPLIED WITHIN100' OF WATER. TREATMENTS WILL NOT BE PERFORMED NEAR HOMES. TREATMENT WILL ONLY BE DONE ON THE UPLAND AREA BETWEEN THE WETLAND EASTERN EDGE AND THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS. PROPERTY OWNER APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO TREATMENT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. Mosquito Abatement Program (2005-2009) @ A 1 000 DEVELQ,Wn.:..NT PLANNING CIZ,,~U~ENTON RECE~VED ,- -' DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the· quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "pro&f~~NN\NG "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. OE.\lE.8?~~? RE-WON fEB 1 ~ 1.rJJ5 "r~\'\f~U H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement P~@rnl2(!)05 _ Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc02/14/05 A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Mosquito Abatement Program 2005-2009 2. Name of applicant: City of Renton ~ 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Allen Quynn, Project Manager City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way, 5th Floor Renton, W A 98055 425-430-7247 4. Date checklist prepared: February 14,2005 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton, PlanninglBuildinglPublic Works Department 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Begin Construction Annually April -September, 2004 through End Construction 2009 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. * City of Renton, 1989, Environmental Checklist ECF-002-89 for the 1989-1993 Mosquito Abatement Program. * City of Renton, Office of the Hearing Examiner, 1989 Report and Decision File No. AAD-035-89, Mosquito Abatement Appeal -Panther Creek Wetlands. May 31. * Shapiro and Associates, 1989, Panther Creek Wetland Reptile and Amphibian Survey, August, Seattle, WA. Prepared for the City of Renton, Renton, Washington. * Beak Consultants, Inc., 1990, Final Report of Wildlife Surveys Conducted at the Panther Creek Wetland Complex, Kirkland, WA. Prepared for the City of Renton, Renton, ~\~G Washington. ~ ~\J".~~ €.\..o~\J\~ "'€.~ * Beak Consultants, Inc., 1991, City of Renton Mosquito Abatement Prog~ <:w'llaIife 1..'U'U~ Survey, July. Prepared for the City of Renton, Renton, Washington. 'tt~ 1. ~ ., H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp ~~(2,~~~~\J * Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc., 1992, Mosquito Abatement Program, 1992 Wildlife Survey, Bellevue, WA. Prepared for the City of Renton, Washington. * Shapiro and Associates, 1993, Mosquito Abatement Program, 1993 Survey and Final Report, July, Seattle, WA. Prepared for the City of Renton, Renton, Washington. * Whitworth, Terry, 1991, City of Renton Panther Creek Wetlands Mosquito Abatement Program, Mosquito Control Alternatives Report, Tacoma, W A. Prepared for the City of Renton, Renton, Washington. * Clarke Mosquito Control Products, Inc., Project label for Biomist® Insecticide. Roselle, IL. * Whitworth, Terry, 1991, Mosquito Monitoring and Control in the Panther Creek Marsh, 1991, Tacoma, WA. Prepared for the City of Renton, Renton, Washington. * Whitworth, Terry, 1992, Mosquito Monitoring and Control in the Panther Creek Marsh, 1992, Tacoma, W A. Prepared for the City of Renton, Renton, Washington. * Whitworth, Terry, 1993, Mosquito Monitoring and Control in the Panther Creek Marsh, 1993, Tacoma, W A. Prepared for the City of Renton, Renton, Washington. * City of Renton, 1994, Environmental Checklist LUA-094-66, ECF for the 1994 Mosquito Abatement Program. * City of Renton, 1995, Environmental Checklist LUA-095-038, ECF for the 1995-1999 Mosquito Abatement Program. * City of Renton, 2000, Environmental Checklist LUA-00-025, ECF for the 2000-2004 Mosquito Abatement Program. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. None are needed for spraying in upland areas away from water or wetland areas when conducted by a licensed applicator in accordance the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. The project proposal is to provide mosquito abatement in a 60-acre area of Talbot Bill adjacent to and upland of the eastern edge of the Panther Creek Wetlands located east of SR-167. The proposed program will be very similar to the program conducted in 2000- 2004. It will consist only of land treatment applications of an ultra low volume (UL V) synthetic insecticide spray to brush and other upland vegetation using a gasoline-powered, backpack-mounted portable blower. The program will also consist of maximum spraying frequencies of twice per week typically during the months of May through August when N\NG mosquito populations are higher. Treatment will be conducted in upland areas awat f~.rnW~N water or wetland areas by a licensed applicator/entomologist as conditionsOtt~~Ifu: i1f accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Agricult~'\ l<j~fj H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement rt.'O ,J~~t·'t. Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp . ct~~'\il ~U ~~ approved application requirements. As discussed in Section B.5.a of the Environmental Checklist, no water treatment or wildlife census is proposed to be conducted, as it was performed in the 1995-1999 program. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The. project area is adjacent to and upland of the eastern edge of the Panther Creek Wetlands generally located between SR-167 on the west and Lake Avenue SouthlTalbot Road South on the east and extending from SW 43rd Street on the south to 1-405 on the north, within the City limits of Renton, Washington. The entire project is within the southeast quarter of Section 19, the east one-half (1/2) of Section 24, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other _____ _ The project area, located to the east of and upland of the Panther Creek Wetlands, is generally moderate to steeply sloping with a few areas of a gentler slope. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?)? Some portions of the hillside east of the Panther Creek Wetlands are at 100%, with a few short, nearly vertical slopes. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey for the King County Area of Washington designates the soil in the project area as being comprised of the Beausite (Be), Alderwood (Ag), Indianola (In), and Seattle, (Sk) series. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. e. The City of Renton has mapped the hillside immediately adjacent to the Green River Valley and the Panther Creek Wetlands as a landslide and erosion hazard. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. E.NT pLANNING OE.\lE.LOPt-.fiOf RE.Nl0N c\1'< N/A fEa '2. ~ 1.\)\)5 H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp REtE\~~U f. Could erOSI~.. occur as a result of clearing. constru ..... Jn, or use? If so, generally describe. N/A g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? N/A h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2. AIR No mitigation measures are proposed because the proposed insecticide binds to the soil and rapidly breaks down (24-48 hours), reducing the potential for impact to the soil or leaching into downstream water bodies or wetlands. See also Section B.3. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (Le., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The insecticide would be applied to brush and other vegetation in a low concentration mist using a gasoline-powered, backpack mounted, portable sprayer. Quantity or application rate is between approximately 0.0035 and 0.0070 pounds per acre. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: To prevent excess drift application may only be made if wind speeds are 10 miles per hour or less. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes. The project is adjacent to and east of the Panther Creek Wetlands on the westside of SR-167. The Panther Creek Wetlands, which receives storm drainage flows from the plateau area and the Panther Creek east of the Green River Valley, drains to the west through a 72" culvert crossing under SR-167 into a conveyance channel along SW 23rd Street. The channel empties into Springbrook Creek where the flow continues north to join the Black River in the Black River Pump Station forebay, which is then pumped into the Green River. The Duwamish River, fWPljld\N\NG Ot:.\lt:.6\~~~fl,t:.N\O\'~ H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement B 1 ~ 1\tj'l Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp ft: ~~~\~~~U by the conb ... ~nce of the Black and Green Rivers, flo~~ northerly into ~lIiott Bay of Puget Sound. 2} Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. Portions ofthe project are within 200 feet of the Panther Creek Wetlands. No work will occur in the wetlands. Work will occur adjacent to the wetlands in the upland areas on the hillside east of the wetlands. 3} Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A 4} Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 5} Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes. The Panther Creek Wetlands, adjacent to the project area, is within the 100- year floodplain according to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map 530033C0979F, dated September 29,1989. The FEMA Flood Insurance Study September 29, 1989, regulatory base flood (100-year) water surface elevation in the wetlands is 16.0 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. 6} Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and antiCipated volume of discharge. No. Spraying of BIOMIST®/Kontrol 4-4® is not permitted to, or within 100-feet of, water or wetlands. However, insecticide spray may drift in the air out of the treatment area. See Section B.3.d for proposed measures to mitigate the potential for drift of the treatment spray. b. Ground Water: 1} Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general deSCription, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 2} No Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals.~.; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of v.~~\~G animals or humans the system(s} are expected to serve. \IE.LO?lJIE.~:N10~ oE crr'f of H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp fEa a ~ 1{l{l5 f\ECt.\~\;;U No waste material will be discharged into the ground as part of this proposal, but will be disposed of as noted in Section B.3.d. Also, see Section B.3.d for proposed measures to mitigate the potential for discharges into the ground from accidental spills. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm' water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. Surface water runoff enters the Panther Creek Wetlands from the Rolling Hills Creek to the north, from Panther Creek to the south, and from local drainage flows from the east. Groundwater seepage daylights from the hillside and flows into the Panther Creek Wetlands. 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Waste from accidental spills of insecticide or equipment wash-down water may potentially enter the ground or surface waters. Insecticide spray may also drift into the surface water from the air. See Section B.3.d for proposed mitigation measures. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: To prevent excess drift of the proposed insecticide sprays and potential drift into the Panther Creek Wetlands, application may only be made as conditions permit in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture approved application requirements, e.g., restrictions on the maximum wind speed above which treatment may not be conducted .. Wind speeds determined by the applicator at the time of treatment must be 10 miles per hour or less and must be blowing in an easterly direction away from the Panther Creek Wetlands or the treatment may not be conducted. Equipment wash-down water is to be disposed of off-site in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements so as not to contaminate the surface or ground waters. Accidental spills are to be reported immediately by the applicator to the City of Renton, the State Department of Health, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Ecology (spills in water). Appropriate measures are to be immediately implemented by the applicator to first contain and then to clean up the spill in accordance with Department of Agriculture and/or other applicable agency requirements. Only small quantities (see Section B.7.a.l Environmental Checklist) of the proposed insecticide will be on the project site to minimize impacts if a spill occurs. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ~ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ~ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ~ shrubs H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp ...K..-grass _ pasture __ crop or grain ...K..-wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ...K..-water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None, except for clearing of any fallen trees or brush debris that may obstruct the trail from which treatment was performed in previous years. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: N/A 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds:~(Q~~ eagle, €ngbird"§) other: Ducks. Canadian Geese Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver,~ Grey Squirrel. raccoon Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish,~: Stickel backs Five wildlife census studies were conducted annually from 1989 to 1993 in the Panther Creek Wetlands to characterize the type and abundance of species in the complex and to determine what, if any, impact the 1989-1993 treatment program had on the existing fauna. The surveys were added as a condition of implementing the 1980-1993 program in the Hearing Examiner's decision to deny an appeal of the 1989-1993 program's environmental determination. The surveys found that the Panther Creek Wetlands continues to be a generally stable wildlife community, with some reduction in the number of amphibian and aquatic species captured. However, factors other than reduction of the available insect populations resulting from the treatment program were also noted as probably causes for the fewer number of captures, such as drought and sampling/behavioral considerations. As with the previous 1995-1999 program, water treatment is not included in the proposed program primarily because of the treatment's high cost and questionable effectiveness. Applying chemicals to water is also contrary to City Policy to improve and protect the qualitY of the City's surface water and wetlands. Further study to definitively determine the probable cause of decline in captures of these species is not warranted because the scope of this program is limited to upland spraying. It is the water treatment, rather than the land treatment, that poses a LANN\NG more direct impact to the abundance of insect larvae fed upon bOE.~ft~~'CE.~E.~ON predators. The species for which the land treatment poses a most direct iriiiJg'c?f were found by the census to have continued to be abundant and diverse. fEB '1. ~ lUUS Rit~X~~U H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlsl.doc\AQtp b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are no threatened or endangered species within the area to be treated. Chinook salmon, which are currently listed as threatened, are present 0.5-1.0 mile to the west in Springbrook Creek. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Yes. The project site is part of the Pacific Flyway. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The applicator will immediately notify the City of Renton and stop treatment if any animals are killed in association with the abatement program. No animal kill is expected because BIOMIST®, when used according to the manufacturer's instruction as approved by EPA, are reported to have low toxicity to animals. See Sections B.3.d and B.7.a.2 for other mitigation measures. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing,etc. N/A b. . Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. N/A c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: . N/A 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Waste from accidental spills of insecticide or equipment wash-down water may potentially pose a health hazard to fish and aquatic invertebrates. Insecticide spray may also drift in the air out of the treatment area. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. G t-f\' p\..ANN\N Spill Response Assistance is not anticipated. The quantity of insecti~fQii?~\t~ p,E.t'frON project site at anyone time will not exceed 9 gallons of diluted inse2Hcide I. 1~~J5 concentrate. No undiluted insecticide concentrate will be on the site. fEB 1 "I H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement 6't,tErJ\:U Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp n Only small quantities of the proposed insecticides will be on the project site and will be stored, handled, and disposed of in accordance with EPA and Department of Agriculture requirements (see Sections B.3.dand B.7.a.2). In the event of a spill, appropriate measures will be implemented as noted in Section B.3.d. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: The insecticide spraying must be conducted in upland areas (away from water or wetland areas) by a licensed applicator in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act or FIFRA) and Department of Agriculture (WAC-16-228) approved application requirements. BIOMIST® is not to be applied within 100-feet from water or near homes. See Section B.3.d for other measures. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic from 1-405 and SR-167 may be heard from the project site, but will not affect the project. Work will be conducted between 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM during hours of peak noise generation from 1-405 and SR-167, and will not have a significant noise impact on the residential use in the area. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construCtion, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Noise due to the gasoline-powered, backpack sprayer may be expected at a maximum of one or two times weekly from 6:00 AM and 7:00 PM, five working days per week. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Normal working hours will be between 6:00 AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through Friday. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The current use of the project area is largely undeveloped, forested land. Low density and single-family residential dwellings border the project site to the east. The undeveloped, open/forested Panther Creek Wetlands borders the project treatment area to the west. Valley Medical Center borders the project area on the south and 1-405 borders on the north. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Yes. The Renton Green River Valley was historically used for agriculture ~~~It.lJ"'LANJl\NG Panther Creek Wetlands and adjacent areas may have been used for ~~9lrp'osei;\'ftO but not at the present time. fEB 1 ~ 1005 c. Describe any structures on the site. H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp Many single-family residential dwellings are located on the eastern border of the project site treatment area. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Portions of the site are zoned Low-Density and Single-Family Residential. f. What is the current comprehensive plan deSignation of the site? RLD and RSF g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The Panther Creek Wetlands and its floodplain are not designated as shorelines of the State and, therefore, are not subject to the Shoreline Master Program. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. The site or portions of the site have been classified as within, containing, or bordering the following environmentally sensitive areas: tOO-year floodplain, wetlands and streams, surficial aquifer susceptibility, seismic hazard, erosion hazard, landslide hazard and wildlife habitat. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: N/A 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? or low-income housing. None H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. N/A b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: N/A 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? N/A b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? N/A d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: N/A 12.' RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The Thomas Teasdale Park is situated approximately 1000 feet east of the project treatnient area. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. tANN\NG LOf'lJ\~~:NlON No. The spraying program does not require any temporary closure Of'Ct'h\\pafif. Notices will be posted in the treatment area as described in Section A.H. ft.~1 ~ 1Ufl~ H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement '''If'\< Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp . ~'t.cvex~\;.v c. Proposed measures to reduce o'r control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: N/A 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N/A 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. N/A b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? N/A c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? N/A e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. N/A f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. l'\'l'\G NlPV-~ o~\I~6\~~~ R~Nl0l'\ N/A g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp rEa 'l,l, 1t:l'UT:.l 1, 3 li!;\" §\~\r~ \':~~,~~\1~U ~~v( N/A 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. N/A b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. N/A 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. N/A b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity, which might be needed. N/A c. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: Date: H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NON PROJECT ACTIONS Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? NN\NG . ~~"~N Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts areuE.\jE.~~~~f RE.t-\\ H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp fC~~;~, f\~C~~~cO 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. . Proponent: Name Printed: Date: ENVCHLST.DOC REVISED 6/98 ?~l'\l'\\l'\G o~"~h~~~~~~ON f£'O 1. l\ 1(j~'l H:\File Sys\SWP -Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 -Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-2000 Mosquito Abatement ~)~~(.~r~ Program\2005 Program\SEPA\envchlst.doc\AQtp ~t~;'{J -"",'" INTERFUND TRANSFER Transfer Number: ------Date: dillS I d-t'sr::, S Wit tJ5 -02-Z, Ere., .fry !1ds1~Jv 4&.vkmm:t= 8fJ~ Department To Be Charged (Transfer Out -From)_ ...... e ... J~r3,f-J ...... e....;;IV;......-_______ .: Description _.1"0 • ~ < Account Number WOlFunction Amount IMU{.qlAi+o A--bGJ+r,:,vItv-1' PrlJ'lTH11 ()'O~-lV1 't~/, OOOC,OO.o(i, 67hOIOo.31-("S:Ofo~ ft,60J-O J. -I 'tOO ,00 , ~35"O .JL -~ ~ IL~ Department Authorization: ....r~ u.rU ~~~\~G II?T~ 0 ~ \0-~~~o~ o~\J\~ ",€ Q~'C.g=t'( 0 'l~\\t) 1. l\ r,.'-> ~t.£> D Department To Be Credited (Transfer In -TO)-.;~....,.1_6-+/.:...~_tJ ____ ~~~~~tJ=-~_~_€_: Description Account Number ~AifLrm J-.°I&.A/iP1.A) lev hdl3J.l.r5. g J ()O Q?O!J. IV WOlFunction Amount .J;'()/O .<ftO,tJ9 Distribution: White: Finance Department Yellow: Department to be Olarged Pink: Department to be Credited Printed: 02-24-2005 Payment Made: CITY OF RENTON 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Land Use Actions 'RECEIPT Permit#: LUA05-022 02/24/2005 09: 15 AM Receipt Number: R0500939 Total Payment: 400.00 Payee: INTER OFFICE· TRANSFER·· ALLEN QUYNN Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code D~scription Amount 5010· 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 400,00 . Payments made for this receipt , ....... '. Trans Method Description Amount Payment rOT A QUYNN 400.00 Account Balances Trans Account Code Description Balance. Due' -.----------------------- 3021 303.000.00.345.85 5006 000.345.81.00.0002 5007 000.345.81.00.0003 5008 000.345.81.00.0004 5009 000.345.81.00.0006 5010 000.345.81.00.0007 5011 000.345.81.00.0008 5012 000.345.81.00.0009 5013 000.345.81.00.0010 5014 000.345.81.00.0011 5015 000.345.81.00.0012 5016 000.345.81.00.0013 5017 000.345.81.00.0014 5018 000.345.81.00.0015 5019 000.345.81.00.0016 5020 000.345.81.00.0017 5021 000.345.81.00.0018 5022 000.345.81.00.0019 5024 000.345.81.00.0024 5036 000.345.81.00.0005 5909 000.341.60.00.0024 5941 000.341.50.00.0000 5954 604.237.00.00.0000 5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Park Mitigation Fee Annexation Fees Appeals/Waivers Binding Site/Short Plat Conditional Use Fees Environmental Review Prelim/Tentative Plat Final Plat PUD Grading & Filling Fees Lot Line Adjustment Mobile Home Parks Rezone Routine Vegetation Mgmt Shoreline Subst Dev Site Plan Approval Temp Use or Fence Review Variance Fees Conditional Approval Fee Comprehensive Plan Amend Booklets/ErS/Copies Maps (Taxable) Special Deposits Postage Tax Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 ~OO .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 · 00 ~~\~G .00 ~~~o"\ · 0 0 ~€.\..~~~ ~~. · 0 cP e\ 15~~~ ~t.~ 1. '" , ~~C,,"\'Ij~Q .. .' .