Joint Meeting of Upper and Lower Santa Clara River Watershed IRWM Groups and Santa Clara River Invasive Weeds Task Force

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

Followed by tour of nearby invasive species removal project

Orchard Rooms A and B - Santa Clarita City Hall

23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita

(Please bring sack lunch)

Agenda and Meeting Notes

  1. Welcome and Introductions
  2. Announcements
  3. Overview of IRWMP process - where are we now
  4. Vision and mission statements re: Invasive Weeds – Lynn, Sabrina and Lauren
  • How to incorporate joint statement into the individual IRWMPs, identify cross watershed project ideas
  1. LA County Stormwater Permit (MS4) invasive weed issues and restoration – Heather
  2. Update on regional board permit for aquatic weeds – Sabrina (on behalf of UC Integrated Pest Management)
  3. Partnership for Arundo control project in Bouquet and San Francisquito Canyons - Heather and Rodger
  4. Prop. 84 Round 2 Project Proposal - Invasive Plant Control, Ecosystem Restoration and Watershed Protection Project – Ventura County – UCSB lead entity
  5. County of Ventura – restoration projects/sites mapping project – Pam Lindsey
  6. Identifying new projects – joint mapping - Roundtable discussion
  7. Other roundtable discussion topics: identify other funding sources, other weeds to focus on
  8. Next meeting date (topics?)
  9. Adjourn to tour (Tour from 1-2 p.m. - approximately)

Meeting Notes

Attendees:

Lauren Everett / Castaic Lake Water Agency (Upper Santa Clara IRWM)
Cathy Holloman / Santa Clarita Water Division
Lynn Rodriguez / Watersheds Coalition of Ventura County
Shirley Birosik / RWQCB-LA
Dan Blankenship / CDFW
Sergio Vargas / VCWPD
Martin Hernandez / VC Sup. Kathy Long’s Office
Henry Gonzalez / Ventura Co. Ag Commissioner
Norma Hogan / Resource Conservation Partners
Sonya Webb / Ventura County Resource Conservation District
Wesley Purcell(sic, ask Roger Harring?) / The Bible Tabernacle
Tom Baston / LA County Fire Dept., Forestry Division
Roger Haring / NRCS/Agriculture Access
Bill Neill / Riparian Repairs
Chris Sulzman / RA Atmore & Sons
Heather Merenda / City of Santa Clarita
Sabrina Drill / UCCE
Winnie Shih / Carollo Engineers
Jeff Ford / Castaic Lake Water Agency
Celine Gallon / Regional Water Quality Control Board
Tasha Hernandez / US Forest Service
Lily Verdone / The Nature Conservancy

Introductions and announcements:

Sabrina – pest website development for information on agricultural and open space resources

IRWMP update (Lynn R.):

  • Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, started with Prop. 50 funding in mid-2000’s
  • Upper SCR and Watersheds Coalitions of Ventura County, LA areas in same funding areas
  • Broad stakeholder convening process for implementation funding (e.g. invasive spp. removal projects)
  • Upper and Lower SCR groups meeting together for several years to coordinate across the region, looking for joint projects for Round 3 funding ($1.31M)
  • New call for projects when funding round is available, projects then added to Project List, only projects on Project List can apply for funding.
  • Prop. 84 and IE funding rounds cost $ for applicants
  • Subsidized funding for disadvantage communities with a no match requirement (may be hard to determine for Ventura County and Santa Clarita)

Vision and Mission Statements Regarding Invasive Weeds (Lynn, Sabrina, Lauren)

  • Joint mission statement and vision developed in 2009/2010 to be adopted by different groups throughout the SCR watershed
  • See attachment
  • Question to the group – does this still work? Can it be used?
  • SCRIWTF can ask members to endorse mission and vision
  • Vision and mission was used for Celebration the Watershed Event last May, helped explain work and collaboration to the public, focal outreach piece to the public
  • Martin H. – add to next meeting agenda so groups can review vision and mission; would be good to put endorsements on website
  • Upper SCR IRWMP group can ask members to endorse
  • Create a logo to represent mission/vision (like LA River logo) that can be posted at public access points and on documents/website
  • How can we “brand” the SCR?
  • Lynn – can look back at past logos developed for SCR and maybe use
  • Roger – did River Rally have logo or mission? Heather – yes, maybe that can be used?
  • Action Item – email Sabrina or Lynn any revisions or suggestions on the vision and/or mission

Presentation on LA County Stormwater Permit – Heather M.

  • See presentation for details
  • Questions:

-TMDL’s are pollutant and reach specific

-TMDL’s called out on 303 list, long process to become active TMDL

-No principal permittee anymore (e.g. City of Santa Clarita taking the lead in City and unincorporated areas on Santa Clarita)

-Enhanced monitoring is included, due in June 2013 – enhanced and coordinated monitoring effort

Presentation on Aquatic Weed Permitting – Sabrina

  • See presentation and FAQ
  • Questions:

-What kind of permit is need for aquatic weed herbicide application and who needs it?

-All applications need NPDES permits

-Permits can be applied for by owner or applicator

-Permits issued per year, per discharger

-Costs approximately $1,900

Presentation on Arundo Control at Bouquet and San Francisquito Canyons – Heather and Roger

  • See presentations
  • Questions:

-What is the cost, per acre? Started with $20K but needs an additional $80K for under 5 acres of invasive weeds (3-4 acres of arundo)

-Still in the biomass removal phase, herbicide has not been used

IRWMP Projects – Lynn

  • UCSB project proposal, arundo and invasive removal project in LSCR approximately 1,000 acres

Forest Service Update on NEPA Process – Tasha H.

  • Can send more information on request
  • Herbicide and hand removal of invasive throughout Angeles National Forest

Supplemental Meeting Notes

From Shirley Birosik (via email 3-13-13)

Please pass along this information to the attendees of the recent Santa Clara joint meeting.

The website where all of this information resides is

Some of the confusion about these permits may stem from the fact there are four of them (plus one of them has an amendment) and one of them is in the process of being updated.

The four current permits are:

1)2004 aquatic weed control permit (now being updated)

2)2011 aquatic animal invasive species control permit

3)2011 spray applications permit

4)2011 vector control permit (with 2012 amendment)

The first aquatic pesticide use permit was adopted quickly in 2001 in response to the court case mentioned at the recent joint meeting. That permit was “intended to cover short-term or seasonal discharges by public entities of pollutants to waters of the United States associated with the application of aquatic pesticides for resource or pest management.” The permit provided coverage for broad categories of aquatic pesticide use including for vector and weed control. The 2001 permit was replaced in 2004 by a weed control permit (the current one) and a separate vector control permit. A variety of legal challenges and court decisions followed which first made it unnecessary to have a permit for application of pesticides directly to waters to control pests such as in the case of controlling vector larvae and aquatic weeds, and then made it necessary. Permitting was required to resume in 2011 as a result and the invasive species control (direct applications), spray applications (only covers use by CA Department of Food and Agriculture and U.S. Forest Service of pesticide products labeled for land use), and vector control (direct or spray applications) permits were adopted. The 2013 draft aquatic weed control permit would cover the point source discharges of pesticide residues resulting from applications using only those algaecides and aquatic herbicides containing the listed active ingredients. The permit would not cover agricultural storm water discharges or return flows from irrigated agriculture and would not cover other indirect or nonpoint source discharges from applications of algaecides and aquatic herbicides, including discharges of pesticides to land that may be conveyed in storm water or agricultural runoff.

One should keep in mind that just because the above general permits state they only cover certain types of activities doesn’t mean that other types of activities which result in pesticides reaching surface waters are allowed to occur without a permit or some other type of regulatory oversight.

Questions to Jenny Chen from Sabrina Drill:

Please see my responses (inblue words) below your questions:

For the LA area, who holds the NPDES Permit? The county?Individual agencies?

JC: You can view our database to see who in the L.A. area are enrolled under the Aquatic Weed Permit. Below are the Web link and the steps to get to the enrollee list for the Aquatic Weed Permit:

How to get the number of enrollees in Aquatic Weed Permit?

(1) Go to this link:

(2) Type the "Order Number" in the box for it. For Aquatic Weed Control Permit, it is 2004-0009-DWQ;

(3) Click "Run Report";

(4) Click on the number below "No. of Active Enrollees" to get the list of entities that are currently enrolled under this permit.

Can/does a private entity such as pesticide applicator or company that treats waterbodies get or need one?

Anyone who discharges pesticide residue to a water of U.S. is required to have the NPDES coverage. If the pesticide application is contracted out to a pesticide applicator, either the project owner or the applicator can be the permittee; so the owner and the applicator need to decide who is responsible for obtaining the permit.

Is the ~$1900 fee for one site/year or for each site that is treated?

JC: The current fee for this permit is $1943.26 per year per discharger (or enrollee) regardless how many projects or sites the discharger has.

Who does the monitoring? Does the water board monitor the monitors?

JC: The permittee (or enrollee) is responsible for the monitoring. Under the current permit (2004 Order), the monitoring results should be submitted annually to the appropriate Regional Water Board for review and comments. Water Board staff may randomly choose some discharge activities and does monitoring for verification.

Who cites the permit holders for violations? How are the fines determined?

JC: The current Aquatic Weed Permit is administered at the Regional Water Board. For L.A. area, it is our L.A. Regional Water Board oversees the discharge activities and follows up with any violations. The amount of fine depends on the nature of the violation.

Do you have a fact sheet or ppt that summarizes the NPDES requirements and steps for aquatic weeds for end users, that is, the people who will doing the herbicide applications? I went through the 88pg draft document and am not sure of the process.

JC: The Fact Sheet is part of the permit. For the 2004 Order (the current Aquatic Weed Permit), the Fact Sheet is the first 19 pages of the permit. For the draft Aquatic Weed Permit, the Fact Sheet is the Attachment D to the permit.

My supervisor Phil Isorena has given quite some talks on the pesticide permits and the permit requirements. He has a ppt, but, he is on vacation and won’t be back until next month. If you have any questions, please call me or call our L.A. Regional Water Board contact staff, Gensen Kai at 213-576-6651 ().

Hope I’ve addressed your questions, please feel free to call or email us if you have any further questions.