DOCSLIB.ORG

Results of Streamflow Gain-Loss Studies in Texas, with Emphasis on Gains from and Losses to Major and Minor Aquifers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Results of Streamflow Gain-Loss Studies in Texas, with Emphasis on Gains from and Losses to Major and Minor Aquifers DistrictCover.fm Page 1 Thursday, February 14, 2002 1:33 PM In cooperation with the Texas Water Development Board Results of Streamflow Gain-Loss Studies in Texas, With Emphasis on Gains From and Losses to Major and Minor Aquifers Open-File Report 02–068 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Results of Streamflow Gain-Loss Studies in Texas, With Emphasis on Gains From and Losses to Major and Minor Aquifers By Raymond M. Slade, Jr., J. Taylor Bentley, and Dana Michaud U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 02–068 In cooperation with the Texas Water Development Board Austin, Texas 2002 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. For additional information write to District Chief U.S. Geological Survey 8027 Exchange Dr. Austin, TX 78754–4733 E-mail: [email protected] Copies of this report can be purchased from U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Box 25286 Denver, CO 80225–0286 E-mail: [email protected] ii CONTENTS Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and Scope .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Ancillary Benefits ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 Method of Gain-Loss Studies ................................................................................................................................... 2 Results .................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Studies in All Reaches .............................................................................................................................................. 2 Studies in Reaches Intersecting Aquifer Outcrops ................................................................................................... 3 Additional Information and Qualifications ............................................................................................................... 3 Selected References ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 PLATES 1–2. Maps showing: 1. Locations of streamflow gain-loss sites and outcrops of major aquifers in Texas 2. Locations of streamflow gain-loss sites and outcrops of minor aquifers in Texas TABLES [at end of report] 1. Characteristics of flow gain-loss studies in Texas ................................................................................................ 5 2. Inventory of daily mean streamflows for active and discontinued streamflow-gaging stations in Texas ............ 23 3. Median streamflow and associated hydraulic characteristics for streamflow-gaging stations in Texas .............. 45 4. Gains and losses from gain-loss studies in Texas ................................................................................................. 55 CONTENTS iii Results of Streamflow Gain-Loss Studies in Texas, With Emphasis on Gains From and Losses to Major and Minor Aquifers By Raymond M. Slade, Jr., J. Taylor Bentley, and Dana Michaud Abstract streamflow gains and losses from all available records of gain-loss studies done by the USGS in Texas. Data for all 366 known streamflow gain-loss Since 1918, the USGS has conducted streamflow studies conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey in gain-loss studies on streams throughout much of Texas. Texas were aggregated. A water-budget equation The usual objective of the gain-loss studies was to that includes discharges for main channels, tribu- obtain data that could be used to estimate discharge taries, return flows, and withdrawals was used to from or recharge to shallow aquifers. Most gain-loss document the channel gain or loss for each of 2,872 studies were done during low-flow conditions because subreaches for the studies. The channel gain or loss low flows are more likely to be steady (not changing with time) than other flows (except in reaches down- represents discharge from or recharge to aquifers stream from major springs or reaches downstream from crossed by the streams. Where applicable, the reservoirs where sustained releases account for most of major or minor aquifer outcrop traversed by each the flow). subreach was identified, as was the length and loca- In 1958, the data for all known streamflow gain- tion for each subreach. These data will be used to loss studies were compiled and published in a report by estimate recharge or discharge for major and minor the Texas Board of Water Engineers (currently the aquifers in Texas, as needed by the Ground-Water TWDB) and the USGS (Texas Board of Water Engi- Availability Modeling Program being conducted neers, 1960). The data for most of the studies done since by the Texas Water Development Board. The data 1958 have been published in annual data reports and also can be used, along with current flow rates for other reports by the USGS. This study carries the docu- streamflow-gaging stations, to estimate streamflow mentation of gain-loss studies a step farther: The gains at sites remote from gaging stations, including sites and losses in stream subreaches (channel segments where streamflow availability is needed for permit- between flow-measuring sites in a reach) were related to ted withdrawals. major and minor aquifer outcrops in digital and geo- graphic information system (GIS) databases. INTRODUCTION Purpose and Scope As part of the Ground-Water Availability Model- The purpose of this report is to summarize the ing (GAM) Program currently (2001) being conducted results of 366 gain-loss studies involving 249 unique by the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), data reaches of streams throughout Texas since 1918. The are needed to quantify the interaction of surface water locations of subreaches for which gains and losses were and ground water for the nine major aquifers (Ashworth computed are indicated by streamflow-measurement and Hopkins, 1995) and most of the 20 minor aquifers sites on maps of major and minor aquifer outcrops. The in Texas. Where streams flow across aquifer outcrops, gain-loss studies are tabulated by sequential number, channel gains and losses constitute aquifer discharge major river basin, stream name, and reach identification, and recharge, respectively. To make this aquifer dis- and the total gain or loss for each reach is given. The charge and recharge information available for the GAM gains and losses for each subreach are tabulated by Program, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in coop- sequential number for the gain-loss study and located eration with the TWDB, compiled data and computed by latitude and longitude of the upstream end of the Abstract 1 subreach. Where applicable, the major or minor aquifer upstream from its mouth. The channel gain or channel outcrop traversed by a subreach is identified. loss can be computed for the subreach between each main-channel measurement site by equating inflows to Ancillary Benefits outflows plus flow gain or loss in the subreach: The compilation of streamflow gain-loss data Qu + Qt + Qr = Qd + Qw + Qe + Qg,(1) could be beneficial to the Water Uses and Availability Section of the Water Resources Management Division where of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commis- Qu = streamflow in at upstream end of subreach; sion (TNRCC). That section is responsible for permit- Qt = streamflow from tributaries into subreach; ting surface-water withdrawals in Texas. Most of the Qr = return flows to subreach; recently issued permits represent contingency permits, Qd = streamflow out at downstream end of sub- which authorize surface-water withdrawals only when reach; the streamflow exceeds a threshold rate. The threshold Qw = withdrawals from subreach; streamflow rate for each contingency permit generally Qe = evapotranspiration from subreach; and represents the total discharge needed to sustain permit- Qg = gain (positive) or loss (negative) in subreach. ted withdrawals downstream from the withdrawal point Thus, for the contingency permit plus any streamflow required as inflow to receiving bays or estuaries. Contingency Qg = Qu + Qt + Qr – Qd – Qw – Qe.(2) permits are used to protect the existing water rights of For most streams, underflow (flow parallel to stream users downstream from newer users. through shallow channel-bed deposits) and bank stor- The TNRCC and others associated with surface- age are considered negligible or minimal. water usage often use USGS current streamflow data Many of the studies were done during winter to available on the World Wide Web to verify existing minimize evapotranspiration. Also, the short length of streamflow conditions pertinent to contingency permits. most subreaches and minimal width of the streams However, there are only about 350 existing streamflow-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4-Year Work Plan by District for Fys 2015-2018
    4 Year Work Plan by District for FYs 2015 - 2018 Overview Section §201.998 of the Transportation code requires that a Department Work Program report be provided to the Legislature. Under this law, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) provides the following information within this report. Consistently-formatted work program for each of TxDOT's 25 districts based on Unified Transportation Program. Covers four-year period and contains all projects that the district proposes to implement during that period. Includes progress report on major transportation projects and other district projects. Per 43 Texas Administrative Code Chapter 16 Subchapter C rule §16.106, a major transportation project is the planning, engineering, right of way acquisition, expansion, improvement, addition, or contract maintenance, other than the routine or contracted routine maintenance, of a bridge, highway, toll road, or toll road system on the state highway system that fulfills or satisfies a particular need, concern, or strategy of the department in meeting the transportation goals established under §16.105 of this subchapter (relating to Unified Transportation Program (UTP)). A project may be designated by the department as a major transportation project if it meets one or more of the criteria specified below: 1) The project has a total estimated cost of $500 million or more. All costs associated with the project from the environmental phase through final construction, including adequate contingencies and reserves for all cost elements, will be included in computing the total estimated cost regardless of the source of funding. The costs will be expressed in year of expenditure dollars. 2) There is a high level of public or legislative interest in the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to MS042 International Boundary and Water Commission Records
    University of Texas at El Paso ScholarWorks@UTEP Finding Aids Special Collections Department 12-9-1975 Guide to MS042 International Boundary and Water Commission records Raymond Daguerre Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.utep.edu/finding_aid This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Special Collections Department at ScholarWorks@UTEP. It has been accepted for inclusion in Finding Aids by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UTEP. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Guide to MS042 International Boundary and Water Commission records Span dates, 1850 – 1997 Bulk dates, 1953 – 1974 3 feet, 5 inches (linear) Processed by Raymond P. Daguerre December 9, 1975 Donated by Joseph Friedkin, International Boundary and Water Commission. Citation: International Boundary and Water Commission, 1975, MS042, C.L. Sonnichsen Special Collections Department. The University of Texas at El Paso Library. C.L. Sonnichsen Special Collections Department University of Texas at El Paso IBWC Biography or Historical Sketch Established in 1889, the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) has responsibility for applying the boundary and water treaties between the United States and Mexico and settling differences that may arise in their application. The IBWC is an international body composed of the United States Section and the Mexican Section, each headed by an Engineer-Commissioner appointed by his/her respective president. Each Section is administered independently of the other. The United States Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission (USIBWC) is a federal government agency and is headquartered in El Paso, Texas. The IBWC operates under the foreign policy guidance of the Department of State.
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface Water Stations in Texas
    1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY I AUSTIN, TEXAS INDEX OF SURFACE WATER STATIONS IN TEXAS Operated by the Water Resources Division of the Geological Survey in cooperation with State and Federal Agencies Gaging Station 08065000. Trinity River near Oakwood , October 1970 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Geological Survey - Water Resources Division INDEX OF SURFACE WATER STATIONS IN TEXAS OCTOBER 1970 Copies of this report may be obtained from District Chief. Water Resources Division U.S. Geological Survey Federal Building Austin. Texas 78701 1970 CONTENTS Page Introduction ............................... ................•.......•...•..... Location of offices .........................................•..•.......... Description of stations................................................... 2 Definition of tenns........... • . 2 ILLUSTRATIONS Location of active gaging stations in Texas, October 1970 .•.•.•.••..•••••..•.. 1n pocket TABLES Table 1. Streamflow, quality, and reservoir-content stations •.•.•... ~........ 3 2. Low-fla.o~ partial-record stations.................................... 18 3. Crest-stage partial-record stations................................. 22 4. Miscellaneous sites................................................. 27 5. Tide-level stations........................ ........................ 28 ii INDEX OF SURFACE WATER STATIONS IN TEXAS OCTOBER 1970 The U.S. Geological Survey's investigations of the water resources of Texas are con­ ducted in cooperation with the Texas Water Development
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Grande Project
    Rio Grande Project Robert Autobee Bureau of Reclamation 1994 Table of Contents Rio Grande Project.............................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................3 Project Authorization.....................................................6 Construction History .....................................................7 Post-Construction History................................................15 Settlement of the Project .................................................19 Uses of Project Water ...................................................22 Conclusion............................................................25 Suggested Readings ...........................................................25 About the Author .............................................................25 Bibliography ................................................................27 Manuscript and Archival Collections .......................................27 Government Documents .................................................27 Articles...............................................................27 Books ................................................................29 Newspapers ...........................................................29 Other Sources..........................................................29 Index ......................................................................30 1 Rio Grande Project At the twentieth
    [Show full text]
  • December 2014 Congressional Report (PDF)
    EPA Review under Clean Water Act Section 404 Congressional Request: 113 HR 3547 – Water: Ecosystems Fiscal Year 2015– December Section I. of the following table lists the Corps of Engineers Individual Standard Permit public notices received by EPA in December 2014 and all comment letters on individual standard permit public notices issued by EPA in December 2014. Section II. of the following table lists all comment letters on Corps of Engineers Individual Standard Permit public notices issued by EPA between October 1, 2013 and November 31, 2014. Where the Corps has made a final permit decision, it is documented below and will not appear in subsequent reports. During this reporting period, EPA received 136 Individual standard permit public notices, performed a detailed review of 89%, and subsequently provided comment letters on 10% of them. EPA is not the only commenter on Corps public notices. Other federal and state agencies and the public routinely provide comments to the Corps. Of the new public notices in Section I, the Corps has issued 14 permits, 0 permit were denied, 8 applications were withdrawn, 108 are still being processed, and 1 was verified as General Permit. Days Date(s) Date of Final Corps DA under Project Name Tracked by EPA County State EPA Review Received by Comment Decision by Decision Number review by EPA2 Letter(s)2 the Corps Date4 EPA2,3 Section I. New Actions (Public Notices and Comment Letters) SAJ-2009- Detailed Review – Municipality of Caguas Caguas Puerto Rico N/A N/A N/A TBD TBD 02331 general comments SAJ-2014-
    [Show full text]
  • Refinery MACT Summary Report: Evaluating Benzene Fenceline Monitoring Data
    Refinery MACT Summary Report: Evaluating Benzene Fenceline Monitoring Data Established March 2020 Updated: 2021Q2 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS..............................................................................................................II LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................... III BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 1 AIR MONITORING FOR BENZENE ............................................................................................ 1 BENZENE FENCELINE MONITORING ................................................................................................................... 1 TCEQ STATIONARY AMBIENT AIR MONITORING ................................................................................................. 1 EVALUATION OF AMBIENT AIR MONITORING DATA ............................................................... 2 EPA DELTA C CALCULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................. 2 TCEQ LONG-TERM AMCV COMPARISON ......................................................................................................... 2 IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL SAMPLERS OF INTEREST .................................................................. 3 FACILITIES WITH SOIS ABOVE THE LONG-TERM AMCV FOR BENZENE .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Installation of Fencing, Lights, Cameras, Guardrails, and Sensors Along the American Canal Extension El Paso District Elpaso, Texas
    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INSTALLATION OF FENCING, LIGHTS, CAMERAS, GUARDRAILS, AND SENSORS ALONG THE AMERICAN CANAL EXTENSION EL PASO DISTRICT ELPASO, TEXAS Lead Agency: U.S. Department of Justice Immigration and Naturalization Service Washington, D.C. Prepared in Conjunction with: HDR Engineering, Inc. Alexandria, VA. Apri11999 Environmental Assessment - Fencing & Lighting Along American Canal Extension El Paso Border Patrol/INS SUMMARY PROJECT SPONSOR: U.S. Department of Justice Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) COMMENTS DUE TO: Manuel M. Rodriguez Chief, Policy & Planning Facilities & Engineering Immigration & Naturalization Service U.S. Department of Justice 425 Eye Street, N.W. Room 2060 Washington, D.C. 20536 Phone.: (202) 353-0383 Fax: (202) 353-8551 TIERING: This Environmental Assessment is tiered from the "Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for JTF-6 Activities Along the U.S./Mexico Border (Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California)", dated August 1994, prepared for the INS. PROPOSED ACTION: TheEl Paso Sector of the United States Border Patrol, the law enforcement arm of the INS, proposes to install fencing, lights, cameras, guardrails and sensors along portions of the American Canal Extension in El Paso, TX. The Proposed Action directly supports the mission of the Border Patrol (BP), and will provide considerable added safety to the field personnel. The project is located near the Rio Grande River in northwestern Texas. All of the project is within the city limits of El Paso. The majority of the Project Location is along a man­ made canal and levee system. Portions of the canal are at times adjacent to industrial areas, downtown El Paso, and mixed commercial with limited residential development.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army on Civil
    ANNUAL REPORT, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1964 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U.S. ARMY. ON CIVIL WORKS ACTIVITIES 1964 IN TWO VOLUMES Vol. 1 Z-2 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1965 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 - Price 45 cents CONTENTS Volume 1 Page Letter of Transmittal ---------------------------------- - v Highlights---------------------- ------------------------_ _ vi Feature Articles-Reaction of an Engineering Agency of the Federal Government to the Civil Engineering Graduate..... Ix Water Management of the Columbia River--------_ -- xv Sediment Investigations Program of the Corps of Engineers ----------------------------------- xIx Water Resource Development-San Francisco Bay ... xxv The Fisheries-Engineering Research Program of the North Pacific Division-------- _----------------- xxx CHAPTER I. A PROGRAM FOR WATER RESOURCE DEVELOP- MENT----------------------------------------- 1 1. Scope and status--------------------------------- 1 2. Organization------------------------------------ 2 II. BENEFITS--------------------------------------- 3 1. Navigation-------------------------------------- 3 2. Flood control----------------------------------- 4 3. Hydroelectric power------------------------------ 4 4. Water supply------------------------------------ 5 5. Public recreation use------------------------------ 5 6. Fish and wildlife-------------------------------- 7 III. PLANNING--------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • REMOTE BRIDGE SCOUR MONITORING: May 1999 a PRIORITIZATION and IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINE
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. TX-00/0-3970-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date REMOTE BRIDGE SCOUR MONITORING: May 1999 A PRIORITIZATION AND IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINE 7. Author(s) 6. Performing Organization Code Carl Haas, José Weissmann, and Tom Groll 8. Performing Organization Report No. Research Report 7-3970-1 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Center for Transportation Research Department of Civil Engineering The University of Texas at Austin University of Texas at San Antonio 11. Contract or Grant No. 3208 Red River, Suite 200 6900 N. Loop 1604 West Research Study 7-3970 Austin, TX 78705-2650 San Antonio, TX 78249 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Research Report Research and Technology Transfer Section/Construction Division September 1997 – May 1999 P.O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, TX 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project conducted in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration. 16. Abstract Having the largest bridge population in the nation, the state of Texas stands to gain much through the development of bridge scour-monitoring and evaluation practices. Because it has such a large bridge population to manage, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) needs a logical and low-cost method of prioritizing and monitoring bridges for scour damage. An algorithm based on code contained in the BRINSAP database can be used effectively to prioritize bridge sites for further consideration of scour countermeasure implementation. Remote mechanical monitoring is an emerging method for detecting and tracking bridge scour.
    [Show full text]
  • 33 CFR Ch. I (7–1–99 Edition) § 116.55
    § 116.55 33 CFR Ch. I (7±1±99 Edition) Expired service life of old bridge llll PART 117ÐDRAWBRIDGE $llll Subtotal llll $llll OPERATION REGULATIONS Share to be borne by the bridge owner llll $llll Subpart AÐGeneral Requirements Contingencies llll $llll Sec. Total llll $llll 117.1 Purpose. Share to be borne by the United States 117.3 Applicability. llll $llll 117.4 Definitions. Contingencies llll $llll 117.5 When the draw shall open. Total llll $llll 117.7 General duties of drawbridge owners and tenders. (d) The Order of Apportionment of 117.9 Delaying opening of a draw. Costs will include the guaranty of 117.11 Unnecessary opening of the draw. costs. 117.15 Signals. 117.17 Signalling for contiguous draw- § 116.55 Appeals. bridges. 117.19 Signalling when two or more vessels (a) Except for the decision to issue an are approaching a drawbridge. Order to Alter, if a complainant dis- 117.21 Signalling for an opened drawbridge. agrees with a recommendation regard- 117.23 Installation of radiotelephones. ing obstruction or eligibility made by a 117.24 Radiotelephone installation identi- fication. District Commander, or the Chief, Of- 117.31 Operation of draw for emergency situ- fice of Bridge Administration, the com- ations. plainant may appeal that decision to 117.33 Closure of draw for natural disasters the Assistant Commandant for Oper- or civil disorders. ations. 117.35 Operations during repair or mainte- (b) The appeal must be submitted in nance. writing to the Assistant Commandant 117.37 Opening or closure of draw for public interest concerns. for Operations, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • El Paso Del Norte: a Cultural Landscape History of the Oñate Crossing on the Camino Real De Tierra Adentro 1598 –1983, Ciudad Juárez and El Paso , Texas, U.S.A
    El Paso del Norte: A Cultural Landscape History of the Oñate Crossing on the Camino Real de Tierra Adentro 1598 –1983, Ciudad Juárez and El Paso , Texas, U.S.A. By Rachel Feit, Heather Stettler and Cherise Bell Principal Investigators: Deborah Dobson-Brown and Rachel Feit Prepared for the National Park Service- National Trails Intermountain Region Contract GS10F0326N August 2018 EL PASO DEL NORTE: A CULTURAL LANDSCAPE HISTORY OF THE OÑATE CROSSING ON THE CAMINO REAL DE TIERRA ADENTRO 1598–1893, CIUDAD JUÁREZ, MEXICO AND EL PASO, TEXAS U.S.A. by Rachel Feit, Heather Stettler, and Cherise Bell Principal Investigators: Deborah Dobson-Brown and Rachel Feit Draft by Austin, Texas AUGUST 2018 © 2018 by AmaTerra Environmental, Inc. 4009 Banister Lane, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78704 Technical Report No. 247 AmaTerra Project No. 064-009 Cover photo: Hart’s Mill ca. 1854 (source: El Paso Community Foundation) and Leon Trousset Painting of Ciudad Juárez looking toward El Paso (source: The Trousset Family Online 2017) Table of Contents Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 The Oñate Crossing in Context .............................................................................................................. 1 .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 536 Part 117—Drawbridge Operation Regulations
    Pt. 117 33 CFR Ch. I (7–1–12 Edition) (c) Any Order of Apportionment 117.47 Clearance gages. made or issued under section 6 of the 117.49 Process of violations. Truman-Hobbs Act, 33 U.S.C. 516, may be reviewed by the Court of Appeals for Subpart B—Specific Requirements any judicial circuit in which the bridge 117.51 General in question is wholly or partly located, 117.55 Posting of requirements. if a petition for review is filed within 90 117.59 Special requirements due to hazards. days after the date of issuance of the ALABAMA order. The review is described in sec- tion 10 of the Truman-Hobbs Act, 33 117.101 Alabama River. U.S.C. 520. The review proceedings do 117.103 Bayou La Batre. 117.105 Bayou Sara. not operate as a stay of any order 117.107 Chattahoochee River. issued under the Truman-Hobbs Act, 117.109 Coosa River. other than an order of apportionment, 117.113 Tensaw River. nor relieve any bridge owner of any li- 117.115 Three Mile Creek. ability or penalty under other provi- sions of that act. ARKANSAS 117.121 Arkansas River. [CGD 91–063, 60 FR 20902, Apr. 28, 1995, as 117.123 Arkansas Waterway-Automated amended by CGD 96–026, 61 FR 33663, June 28, Railroad Bridges. 1996; CGD 97–023, 62 FR 33363, June 19, 1997; 117.125 Black River. USCG–2008–0179, 73 FR 35013, June 19, 2008; 117.127 Current River. USCG–2010–0351, 75 FR 36283, June 25, 2010] 117.129 Little Red River.
    [Show full text]