relate to steel andrelated tributaries,and portions of 65 industries,and to develop uses municipalities in five counties forthese resources so that they (Greene, Fayette, Westmoreland, may contribute to the economic Washington, and Allegheny). revitalization of the region. Since SIHC'sManagement In general, the land use within Action Plandefines the rivers as the study corridor tends to range the connecting thread of the fromundeveloped in the southern heritage area,the Monongahela areasto urbanand industrial uses RiverConservation Plan is a in the northerncommunities. logical method to achieve these There are some smaller goals. communities, particularlyto the south, which have residential C. Project Area Characteristics uses along the river. The Monongahela River Basin extends north fromwestern According' to 1990 census data, Marylandand West Virginia into the populationof study corridor southwesternPennsylvania and comm6nities totaled 668,440 ends at the river's confluence people, over 30 percent of the with the Allegheny, which forms t�al population of the five the Ohio River at Pittsburgh. counties along the river. As a From its origin at theconfluence whole, the study corridor of the West Fork and Tygart municipalities had fewer Rivers in West Virginia, the residents under the age of 18 and Monongahela flowsfor more over the age of 64 thanthe approximately 128 miles and rest of the region. Study corridor drains approximately 7,390 communitiestended to be older square miles. when comparedto state and national averages as well. The study corridor forthe Census data from 1990 indicated Monongahela River that study corridor communities Conservation Plan covers only also tended to have higher the portion of the river from the unemployment rates than the West Virginia/Pennsylvania surrounding municipalities. border (Mason-Dixon Line)near Point Marion, Pennsylvania D. Resource Data Analysis and (river mile 90) to the Glenwood Conclusions Bridge in the City of Pittsburgh A detailed analysis of available (river mile 6). The width of the resource data revealed numerous study corridoris approximately issues, concerns,constraints, and one mile on either side of the opportunities related to the study river, or to the top of the nearest corridor. Primary among these slope. It includes approximately were commercial use of the river, 84 river miles, sections of 58 the emergence of recreational

5 opportunities, water quality, the the decliningnumber of lack of coordinated land use industries along its banks and planningalong the river, the increasingly stringent presence of numerous industrial environmental regulations. sites and brownfields, and However, serious threatsto water plannedprojects which will have quality still exist withinthe study a major impact upon the corridor, with abandonedmine character and use ofthe river. drainage being foremostamong those. One issue which makes an There is no question that analysis of water quality commercial shipping is the major particularlydifficult is that, while use forthe Monongahela River. numerous water quality studies The fivelocks located within the have been undertaken on the study corridor handled up to 19 Monongahela, they vary million tons of cargo in 1997, significantlyin the parameters hauled by more than7,500 and types ofsampling conducted. vessels. This places the As a result, researchers Monongahelaamong the top attempting to review this inlandwaterways in the U.S. in voluminous data are oftenleft termsof commercial shipping. with a mix that cannotbe easily One issue that has emerged in compared. recent yearsis the potential for conflict between the large Land use regulation is another number ofcommercial vessels fieldin which a coordinated andthe increasing number of effortis lacking. At least 15 recreational users on the river. municipalities within the study Recreational use on the river has corridor had no landuse increased dramaticallyin recent regulations at all, andmore than years as water quality has halfof the 50 remaining improved andthe closing of municipalities had zoning only at manufacturingplants has opened the county level. Particularly in riverfrontaccess. A total of more the southernportion ofthe study than 120 recreational facilities, corridor, this has created a such as parks, marinas, golf situation where riverfront courses, and trails are located development, including within the study corridor, which residential, industrial, and creates numerous opportunities recreational, has been impeded forrecreation and, occasionally, by conflictingland uses. conflicts with commercial shippingas well. The primary opportunity for development along the river As mentioned above, recent comes in the formofreusing decades have seen an abandoned industrialsites, improvement in water quality in known as brownfields. The the MonongahelaRiver, due to shores ofthe river contain dozens 6 ofbrownfields, most of which infrastructureimprovement. As areabandoned mines and dumps, outlined by the U.S. Army Corps formercoal tipples, and vacant of Engineers, the "Lower Mon industrial plants. There are Project" will consist of the currently plansto redevelop removal of Locks andDam No. 3 several of these sites, such as the and the renovation ofLocks and formerU.S.X.Duquesne Works Dams 2 and 4. In the short term, andthe formerNational Tube the project is expected to result in Works in McKeesport, but many the loss ofapproximately 400 other major brownfields remain jobs. However, due to projected empty. increases in shippingonce the project is completed, 8,000 new While the redevelopment plans jobs and$402 million in forthe Duquesne Works and economic benefits areexpected. other brownfields certainly qualifyas major undertakings, The third project discussed here there arethree other major is the creation ofa series of boat planned projects that will also tours and landingsites as the have direct impacts on the river focalpoint ofthe Rivers of Steel and access to it. The first of Heritage Area. This project, as these is the Mon/Fayette definedin SIHC'sManagement Expressway, a plannedtoll road Action Plan,will help to inform that, when completed, would visitors ofthe historic, cultural, connect 1-68, 1-70, and 1-376. andnatural resources of the river. Portions of this project are In order to furtherthe currently under construction and development ofthese tours, other sections are currently in the Mackin andSIHC have Environmental Impact Statement coordinated to identifythe phase. The Mon/Fayette communities in which the Expressway will directly affect primary landing sites should be the Monongahela River with at located. This Determinationwas least two major river bridges, based on criteria such as but, it will also create new access concentrations ofhistoric to study corridor communities resources, availability of andtie them more closely to the riverfront property, andexisting interstate transportation system. river-based facilities. The It is anticipatedthat this locations selected forprimary improved access will help spur landingsites included redevelopment effortsat many of Greensboro, Rices Landing, the brownfield sites and it may Brownsville, Belle Vernon, increase recreational usage of the Charleroi,Monessen, Donora, river as well. Monongahela, McKeesport, and Homestead. The second major planned project also deals with 7 E. Project Timeline As noted previously, this document summarizes the Final Report forthe Monongahela River Conservation Plan. This is the last of three draftsand will be submitted to DCNR for listing on the Rivers Registry.

8 II. INTRODUCTION Conservation Planwas initiated' and through this context that the A. Introduction recommendations and management options were The MonongahelaRiver has developed, andmust be played anunparalleled role in the considered. history of America. It has served a transportationfunction for both B. Project Background its native residents andfor The development of the settling colonials. It provided a meansto access the Ohio River Monongahela River andto expandand explore Conservation Planstemmed from the opportunityposed by DCNR, westward. It also became the mechanism which propelled the andSIHC's Management Action industrieson it shores to Plan(MAP), as generated worldwide importance and through the Pennsylvania unequaled strength. Heritage ParksProgram.

Through its changingrole, the The Rivers Conservation Monongahela River itself has Programprovided a funding source fordeveloping the plan, changed. It has been transformed from.afast-running, wide and andas important,allocated a shallow river to a slow moving, fifty-fiftymatching incentive to implement the recommendations deeply pooled body of water. It has gone froma pristine, natural produced through the planning waterwayto one that could not process. Therefore, this planning sustain the simplest of lifeforms. procedure had an active component to it, affordingthe Today, the Monongahela is in the opportunityto carryout the midst of changeonce again. The intentions of the planitself, and manyfactories, mines, and mills preventing a lifelessplan. which have historically claimed its banksare receding, as is their SIHCis the developing entity for effectupon the river. Although it the state andfederal Rivers of still remains primarilya Steel Heritage Area. SIHC's commercial waterway, other uses MAPprovided a frameworkfor arecoming to light. New carrying out its mission: to riverfront land is being freed conserve, interpret, promote, and frompast industrial constraints, manage the historic, cultural, andopportunities that have not natural, and recreational been seen in over a centuryare resources of the steel andrelated now arising. industries in southwestern Pennsylvania,and to develop uses for these resources so they It is in this context that the MonongahelaRiver

9 may contribute to the economic evaluate, and produce revitalization of the region. recommendations forthe resources of the Monongahela Within the MAP, the rivers are Riverwas a natural extension of the centraltheme, providing a SIHC'smission, and the frameworkon which to develop conjunction of two the heritage area. Therefore, the Commonwealth initiatives. creation of a plan to identify,

10 III. PROJECT AREA the nearest steep slope (Figure 1 ). CHARACTERISTICS The boundaryof the study areawas determined through the A. Location coordinated effortsbetween SIHC and Mackin Engineering The Monongahela River basin is Company. This plan covers situated within the southwestern approximately 84 r.m., sections of Pennsylvania region of the 58 tributary waters (Figure 2), and Appalachian Plateau. The basin portions of 65 municipalities in extends eastward through central five counties. Westmoreland and Somerset Counties, south into western C. Topography Maryland and West Virginia, west The study area is located in the through central Greene and Kanawhasection of the Washington Counties, and north to Appalachian Plateau physiographic its confluence with the Allegheny province. This particular section is River at Pittsburgh, which forms deeply bisected by the the Ohio River. From its origins at Monongahela River and the confluence of the Tygartand characterized by deep, narrow West Fork Rivers in Fairmont, valleys with steep slopes anda West Virginia, the Monongahela meanderingfloodplain. The relief, flowsnorthward forapproximately or slope height, in this areawas 128 river miles (r.m.) before typically 250 to 300 feetalong ending at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. smaller tributariesand 400 to 500 B. Size feetalong major streams. The width of the valley floorvaried The Monongahela River basin from0.4 to 0.6 miles. The river drains approximately 2820 square elevation is approximately 778 feet miles in southwestern above sea level (at the state line), Pennsylvania, 4150 square miles in while the river elevation located at West Virginia, and 416 square the northernedge of the study miles in Maryland(Pennsylvania corridor was approximately 710 Departmentof Environmental feet above sea level. Protection [PADEP], 1989). The study corridor forthe Monongahela Much of the development along the River Conservation Plan covers river is governedby the floodplain only the portion of the river located patterns and steep topography of between the West the river valley. As a result, Virginia/Pennsylvaniaborder near development tends to concentrate Point Marion, PA (r.m. 90) and the along tributaries. Glenwood Bridge located near the Pittsburgh city limits (r.m. 6). The width of the corridor extends approximately one mile to either side of the river or to the ridge of

11 Undevelopedland along theriver.

D. CorridorCharacteristics Open space lines the river in Fayette County. Mixed among the 1. Land Use open space arepockets of Land use information was collected residential and industrialland. during a fieldsurvey conducted by Large areas of residential land Mackin in February, 1998. Land occur in Point Marion, Masontown, use data is broken into eight andBrownsville, threeof the larger categories: Residential, communitiesin Fayette County. Commercial, Industrial, These communitiesalso include Institutional, Agricultural, Open commercial downtown areas which Space, Public/Open Space, and are surrounded by residential Public/Restricted (Table 1). The properties. field survey determined thata rather large percentage of Throughout theriver corridor in developed land along the river is WashingtonCounty, industrial, active or abandoned industrialland residentialand open space land uses or limitedfor development by steep are distributed evenly. Industrial slopes. In Greene and Allegheny land occurs at several locations, Counties, industrial land is the most most of which is surroundedby prevalent land use. The industrial residential communities that once land use classificationincludes provided the workforcefor large activeand abandoned coalmines, industrial operations. Other areas steel mills, slag piles,and mine of Washington County withinthe tipples. The most prevalent land corridor are used as open space and uses within the corridor are contain steep slopes. residential and open space totaling over 63 percent of land (Figure 3).

12 Table 1 Land Use

Land Use Type Percent of Total Agricultural 0.13 Commercial 11.53 Industrial 18.95 Institutional 0.07 Open Space 32.75 Public/Open Space 4.30 Public/Restricted 0.30 Residential 31.97 Total 100.00 Source: Mackin Engineering Company, 1998.

Westmoreland County includes 2. Zoning three largetracts of industrial land The corridor includes portions of adjacent to the river. In fact, each 65 municipalities, of which 50 municipality located on the river have zoning ordinances. has a large tract of industrial land Municipalities that do not have along the river. Largeresidential zoning are located in less areas arelocated within the populated areasof Greene and corridor in the City of Monessen Washington Counties. Only one and the community of North Belle municipality in Greene County, Vernon. Both municipalities also CumberlandTownship, has zoning. contain small commercial districts. Ten municipalitiesin Washington County do not have anyform of In Allegheny County, the majority land use control. Municipalities of the landalong the river is along the river in Fayette County industrial. This includes both arecovered by a countywide active andabandoned industrial zoning ordinanceenforced by sites, as well as redevelopment county appointed zoning officers. projects whichare now underway. The remaining 3 7 municipalities Commercial areasnear the river are have municipal zoning ordinances municipal commercial districts which areenforced by appointed located along throughways. municipal zoning officers. Almost all residential land occurs away fromthe river due to the In the municipalities having zoning intense industrial development ordinances, a largepercent of land which limits access to the river. along the river is zoned industrial which typically limits public river access. The nature of these sites

13 Table 2 1990 Population Distribution

Percent <18 yrs. old Percent 18-64 yrs. old

United States Source: 1990 U.S. Census.

also deter non-industrial These figuresreveal that river development adjacent to industrial municipalities, excluding thoseof property. Less than 10 Fayette County, had smaller municipalities have zoningfor percentages of population under specificriver-related development, the age of 18, and larger which generally provides fora populations of residents 64 and mixed use classificationand allows older. These figuresalso reveal light industry, commercial, and that, in each county, the population recreational development. in the Monongahela Valley tends to be older than the population of E. Socio-Economic Profile the rest of the county. Also, when In 1990, thepopulation within the comparedto age data from MonongahelaRiver study corridor Pennsylvaniaand the United municipalities totals 668,440 States, community populations people andconsists of 32 percent located along the Monongahela of the total population of the five River aresignificantly older (Table counties along the river. Over 36 2). percent of Greene, 23 percent of Fayette, 26 percent of Washington, The river municipalities are 6 percent of Westmoreland, and 40 characterizedby a common percent of Allegheny Counties economic identity when compared (City of Pittsburgh included) to similar county, stateand respective populations arelocated national statistics. For example, in municipalities along the river. 76.9 percent of the municipalities Demographicinformation on age along the river had higher 1990 shows that20.4 percent of the unemployment rates thantheir Monongahela Valley's population respective county rate. Donora is below the age of 18, while 19 .4 Borough had the highest 1990 percent areover the age of 64. unemployment rate at 25.2 percent

14 while the Borough of Greensboro centers within the corridor, all of had the lowest at 4.1 percent. The which are in Fayette County. Mon Valley Workforce Survey, These population centers arePoint (Y amatani & Cunningham,1994 ), MarionBorough (pop.1,344), conducted on 35 municipalities Masontown Borough (pop. 3,759), within four counties along the Mid and Belle VernonBorough (pop. Monongahela River, determined 1,202). Manyriver communities in that the Mid Monongahela Greene and Fayette counties are unemployment rate was 11.3 in unincorporated villages andcoal 1993. A complete listing of 1990 patch towns located in larger unemployment rates can be found townships. These patch towns in Appendix B. resulted fromthe prior coal mining industrythat dominated the The 1997 county unemployment landscape fromthe mid 1800s to rates show that unemployment the 1970s. Manyvillages levels have improved dramatically developed close to mine entrances since 1990 {Table 3). Current in the valleys of tributariesof the municipal unemployment estimates Monongahela River. were not available at the time of this study, but 1990 census data These villages aresmall rural demonstrates theregion's communities that functionas their dependence upon coal, steel, own neighborhoods. Manyof the electrical machinery andother villages contain the samehousing manufacturing industries which type and only have one access were nearly extinct (Yamatani & route. Cunningham,1993). From 1980 to 1990, municipalities 1. Population Centers that border the river inFayette Population centers along the river County lost significant were identifiedas municipalities populations. with resident populations over 1,000 with the majority of the The greatestlosses were in Point municipal population being within MarionBorough (-18.4 percent), the study corridor. According to Masontown Borough (-23.4 the 1990 census, (excluding the percent), Brownsville Borough (- City of Pittsburgh), Mackin 21.7 percent), Newell Borough (- estimated that 190,244 people lived 17.6 percent) andBelle Vernon within two miles of the river (Chart Borough (-18.5 percent). 1). Of these only 4,968 lived outside the population centers (Appendix C).

The southernsection of this study areahas only three population

15 Table 3 1990 Unemployment Comparison

1990 Unemployment Rates

Pennsylvania 11.1

United States 6.2 Source: 1990 U.S. Census.

In Washington County, there are 5,802), Charleroi Borough (pop. eight population centers containing 5,014), North CharleroiBorough a total of 26,576 people. These (pop. 1,562), Donora Borough municipalities include East (pop. 5,928), the City of Bethlehem Township (pop. 2,747), Monongahela (pop.4,928), and West Brownsville Borough (pop. New Eagle Borough (pop. 2,172). 1,170), CaliforniaBorough (pop. Mackin identifiedcommercial

Chart 1 Population Distribution By County (Municipalities Bordering Monongahela River)

Greene County Fayette County S% 11% Allegheny County (excluding the City of Pittsburgh) Washington County 58% 18% Westmoreland County 8%

Source: Mackin Engineering Company, 1998.

16 districts in these municipalities The Monongahela River whichmeet daily needs of population centers in residents. Westmoreland County consist of the City of Monessen, North Belle Between the yearsof 1980 and VernonBorough, andRostraver 1990, Monongahela Valley river Township. Only the City of municipalities in Washington Monessen (pop. 9,901) and North County lost 11.3 percent of their Belle Vernon(pop. 2,112) have the populations whilethe county-wide majority of their populations population decreased by only 5 .3 within the corridor. Both of these percent. Eight municipalities along communities developed aroundthe the river lost over 15 percent of steel and glass industries that once their population during this period existed along theriver. Mackin (Table 4). However, the observed that bothNorth Belle SouthwesternPennsylvania Vernonand Monessen maintained Regional PlanningCommission commercial districts capableof (SPRPC) predicts that the providing goods andservices to populations of river communities meet thedaily needs of residents. in Washington County will From 1980 to 1990, both increase by the year 2015 (SPRPC, municipalities lost significant 1994). population. North Belle Vernon decreased by 12.9 percent and

Table4 Population Percentage Change 1980-2015

Change in Monongahela River Municipalities 1980- 1990 1990- 2015 Greene County -5.3 NIA Fayette County -12.4 5.0 Washington County -11.3 5.9 WestmorelandCounty -9.8 11.2 Allegheny County -12.4 9.4 Total Five County Region -12.3 9.0

Change Countywide 1980- 1990 1990- 2015 Greene County -2.3 NIA FayetteCounty -8.8 8.9 Washington County -5.8 10.4 Westmoreland County -5.5 10.8 Allegheny County -7.8 16.0 Total Five County Region -7.3 14.1 Source: 1990 U.S. Census.

17 Monessen lost 16.9 percent. State Routes 51, 88, 119, 148, 166, As indicated in Chart 1, Allegheny 201, 837, and906 arethe primary County ( excluding the City of state roads which travel Pittsburgh) accounts for58 percent north/southwithin the corridor of the total population along the (Figure 3). State Routes 88 and MonongahelaRiver in 1990. 837 combine to extend along the Allegheny County's industrialriver westernside of the river weaving communities developed during the in and out of the study corridor. IndustrialRevolution near the steel Both Rt. 88 andRt. 837 arepart of andcoke factorieswhich blanketed business districtsin Washington the river banks. Allegheny County andAllegheny Counties. The has 18 population centers along the remaining five state routes traverse river, which account for128,227 the easternside of the river from residents. In fact,all of the Point Marion to McKeesport. county's municipalities along the These roadways provide access to river except Elizabeth Borough the river communitiesin Fayette, have populations greater than Westmoreland,and Washington 1,000. Counties.

2. TransportationFacilities Similarlystate roads on the westernside of the river were part a) Roads of the business districts along the Road access within the corridor easternbank. Three east/west state rangesfrom interstate highways to routes crossthe river within the one lanemunicipal roads. study corridor, Rt. 21, Rt. 40 and Interstate 70 (I-70), a limited Rt. 51. Route 21 crosses the river access east/west highway, was the at r.m. 79.4, and connects only interstate located within the CumberlandTownship, Greene corridor. It connects two major County andMasontown Borough, north-south highways, the Fayette County. PennDOT District PennsylvaniaTurnpike (1-76) and 12-0 stated that the 1997 average Interstate 79, and also provides daily trafficon this bridge is over access to PA Rt. 51. 1-70 has exits 9,000 vehicles per day. The Rt. 21 at Speers and Belle Vernonwithin bridge is the only automobile the study corridor. In 1993, the bridge along the 24 mile stretch of average daily trafficon the 1-70 river between Point Marion and bridge which crosses the river at Brownsville. Rt. 40 crosses the Speers andBelle Vernonwas over river connecting Washington and 39,000 vehicles (Pennsylvania Fayette Countiesat West Department of Transportation Brownsville and Brownsville. [PennDOT], District 12-0, personal Here the river is traversed by two communication, July,1997). bridges, the newer Rt. 40 Bridge which is knownas the LaneBane Bridge, andthe old Rt. 40, Inter­ County Bridge. PennDOTDistrict· 18 12-0 determined the 1997 average study corridor. daily vehicle count on these bridges was 8,966 and 3,430, Animportant transportation project respectively. Finally, the Rt. 51 was being studied and constructed bridge is located entirely within during the preparationof this river Allegheny County, crossing the conservation plan. The Mon­ river at Elizabeth Borough and Fayette Expressway, as proposed West Elizabeth Borough. Table 5 by the PennsylvaniaTurnpike provides a comprehensive listing Commission (PTC), would connect of automobile bridges withinthe 1-68 in West Virginia, 1-70, and1-

Table 5 Automobile Bridges

River Automobile Bridge Municipality, County Roadway/ Roadway Link Mile 90+ Rt. 88 PointMarion,Fayette Dunkard, Greene Rt. 88 to Rt. 119 Cheat Rt. 119 (Cheat PointMarion,Fayette Dunkard, Greene Rt. 119 River) 79+ Rt. 21 Masontown,Fayette Cumberland,Greene Rt. 21 55+ Old Rt. 40 W. Brownsville, Brownsville,Fayette Rt. 88 to Brownsville's High St. Washington 55+ Rt. 40 W. Brownsville, l3rownsville,Fayette Rt. 40 Washington 43+ 170 Speers, Washington Rostraver,Westmoreland l 70 41+ N. Charleroi/ N. Charleroi, Washington Monessen, Westmoreland Rt. 88 to Rt. 906 Monessen 38+ Donora/Monessen Donora, Washington Rostraver,Westmoreland Rt. 88/ Rt. 837 to Rt. 201/ I 70 37+ Donora/ Webster Donora, Washington Rostraver,Westmoreland Rt. 837 to Rt. 906/ Rt 51 32+ Monongahela City Monongahela, f<'orward,Allegheny Rt. 88 to Rt. 136 Washington 22+ Rt. 51 Jefferson,Allegheny !Elizabeth,Allegheny Rt. 51 19+ Clairton/ Glassport Clairton, Allegheny Olassport, Allegheny Rt. 837 to Glassport/ Elizabeth Rd. 16+ Mansfield Dravosburg, Allegheny McKeesport, Allegheny Rt. 148 Yough Rt. 148 McKeesport, Allegheny McKeesport, Allegheny Rt. 148 14+ McKeesport, Duquesne, Allegheny McKeesport, Allegheny Rt. 837 to Rt. 148 Duquesne 9+ Rankin Whitaker, Allegheny Rankin,Allegheny Rt. 837 to Braddock Ave. 7+ Homestead Homestead, Allegheny ::::ityof Pittsburgh, Rt. 837 to Browns Hill Rd. Highlevel Allegheny 5+ Glenwood City of Pittsburgh, City of Pittsburgh, Rt. 885 Allegheny Allegheny Source: Mackin Engmeenng, 1998.

19 376 in the City ofPittsburgh. impacts may be either direct or There are five sections to this indirect, andmay be either positive project with only two that could or negative. The scope ofthis potentially affect the study project presents an opportunity for corridor. These two sections are increased community planning the Uniontown to Brownsville and throughout the MonongahelaRiver Route 51 to Pittsburgh sections. Valley. The mannerin which each Both ofthese sections are currently community addresses this in the Environmental Impact opportunity will help determinethe Statement (EIS) preparationstage. overall effectsof the highway No preferredalternative will be project. approved before the year2000. b) River Within the corridor, thislimited River transportationoccurs both access toll road is proposed to commercially and recreationally cross the river nearBrownsville, along the river. Mackin estimated Fayette County andagain near that anaverage ofseven different Duquesne, Allegheny County. The bargecompanies operate on the highway is also proposed to travel river each day. Commercial barges along the northern bank ofthe river chieflytransport coal, petroleum fromRankin Borough to the City products, scrap metal, and ofPittsburgh. The new highway limestone along the river. was proposed to increase Recreational boating also occurs on transportation efficiencywithin the the river andcreates additional Monongahela Valley. It is trafficvolumes during summer anticipated to have broad reaching months. Mackin analyzedthe economic and social effects 1997 lockage andtonnage statistics through the region. Because the forthe locks anddams along the Mon-Fayette Expressway is the river to determinethe amount river largesthighway project proposed traffictraveling between pools in the region, it has the potential to (Table 6). A lockage is calculated impact natural, cultural, and each time a lock chamber equalizes socioeconomic resources of the the water levels between pools. study corridor communities. These

Table 6 1997 River Lockages

River Lock River Mile Vessels Tonnage Lockages Lock2 11.2 7,553 19,310,000 6,120 Lock3 23.8 10,081 15,401,000 9,158 Lock4 41.5 6,955 10,856,000 6,295 Maxwe ll 61.2 6,497 10,577,000 5,425 Gr ays Landing 82.0 2,681 5,451,000 3,017 Source: U.S. Army Engmee nng D1stnct, Pittsburgh,Lock Performance Momt onng System Summary,1997.

20 and a 60 cents-a-ton savings in transportation costs.

To decrease the negative impacts associated withthe renovation of river terminals. the Port of Pittsburgh Commission has begun to coordinate with local financial industryto establish a special economic development fund available forriver terminals. specifically associatedwith the Over 19 million tons of cargo were shipped on impact of thechanging water theMonongahela River in 1997. levels.

The major river project influencing c) Rail river transportation is the "Lower In addition to roadway and river Mon Project" consisting of the travel. the railroad industry removal of Locks and Dam No. 3 represents a strong transportation and therenovation of Locks and element in the study corridor. CSX Dams 2 and 4 by theU.S. Army Corporation and Conrailoperate Corps of Engineers (ACOE). The and maintain railroads on both sides projected. economicimpacts determined in thePotential Economic Impacts of the Replacement of Locks and Dams 2. 3. and 4 on the Lower Mon. prepared for The Port of Pittsburgh Commission by MartinAssociates in June of 1996. stated the dam replacement project will put 400 direct. induced. and indirect jobs at risk at a local economic value of about $15.4 million annually. This negative impact is due to renovations required by the change of waterelevation at existing Activeand in activerail lines follow bothbanks of terminals. In contrast. tonnage is the MonongahelaRiver. expected to increase by 24 percent due to the larger lock chambers and fewerlockages. The twenty year of the river in every county except Lower Mon Project means the Greene. These lines carry coal and creation of 8.800 new jobs. 402 steel fromthe coal mines. million in economic benefits.a 24 preparation plants and steel mills percent increase in trafficcapacity. located along the river (Table 7).

21 d) Public Transportation Public transportationis available in The Port Authority of Allegheny the study corridor municipalities County provides bus transportation within Washington,Westmoreland, to all communities within andAllegheny Counties. In Allegheny County. Stops are Washington and Westmoreland, located throughout the study two public bus companies provide corridor in Allegheny County, and service to the Mid-Monongahela riders are transportedto other Valley communities. These municipalities andthe City of companies are the Mid­ Pittsburgh. MonongahelaValley Transit Authority ( MMVTA)and 88 3. Major Sources of Employment TransitLines, both of which provide service between a) Major Employers MonongahelaValley communities A fieldsurvey, along with the and the City of Pittsburgh. The 1994-1996 edition of the Greater MMVTA provides transportation Pittsburgh Chamber of Commerce solely to communities along the IndustrialPinPointer, were used by river, andbus routes extend as far Mackin to determine major south as CaliforniaBorough and as employers within the study far north as New Eagle Borough. corridor. Sincethe 1970s, the

Table 7 Monongahela River Terminals With Rail Access

River Active IndustrialSites Municipality, County Railroad Mile Access 58.8 CONSOL Luzerne,Fayette CONSOL 58.5 The New Marcus Paulson Luzerne,Fayette CONSOL 45.1 WestmotCoal Company Belle Vernon, Fayette NIA 43.6 Mon-River Towing Belle Vernon,Fayette Comail 43.2 Matt Canestrale Belle Vernon, Fayette CSX, Comail Contracting 34.3 AmericanCarbon & Metals Donora, Washington Comail 24.8 Lock 3 Coal Company Monongahela, NIA Washington 24.1 Dillner Transfer& Storage West Elizabeth, Comail Allegheny 23.6 Clairton Slag Co. Dravosburg, Allegheny NIA 19.5 Glassport Transportation Glassport, Allegheny CSX, Comail -18.5 Commercial Steele Corp. Glassport, Allegheny CSX 17.2 St. Clair Supply Company Glassport, Allegheny CSX 12.1 Union Railroad Duquesne, Allegheny CSX, Comail 10.2 Rochez Brothers Braddock, Allegheny CSX 10.1 JOSH Steele Co. Braddock, Allegheny CSX 09.9 S. H. Bell Braddock, Allegheny CSX Source: The SouthwesternPA Freight TransportationGmdebook, 1995. 22 economic vitality of the area has and three power stations which sufferedfrom the decline of the have over 50 employees (Figure 3). mining,glass and steel industries. Nevertheless,the Monongahela The fieldsurvey conducted by Valley is not absent of industry. Mackin identified several non­ industrial major employers within Major employers within t}lestudy the study corridor, including 17 corridorare businesses who employ public school systems, fourregional over 50 people. The Industrial hospitals, and one university. PinPointer identifiedindustrial employers in all counties of the b) Industrial Parks study corridor, except Greene Five active industrial parks are County forwhich fielddata was located along the river in used to located major employers. Washington, Westmoreland, and TheIndustrial PinPointer identified Allegheny counties. These include: 42 major industrial employers within the study corridor (The • The Greater Charleroi IndustrialPinpointer excluded Industrial Park, located in mining operations and Power Speers Borough, adjacent to I- Plants). Three major employers are 70 and a 1/2 mile fromthe located in Fayette County, 11 in river. Mackin identified 10 Washington County, 2 in active businesses at this site, as Westmoreland County, and 26

U.S.X. ClairtonCoke Works is one of 42 industrial employers alongthe river.

within AlleghenyCounty, together wellas a career and technology they employed 6,935 people at the center. time of the survey. Mackinalso identifiedthree mining operations

23 Former U.S. SteelDuquesne Works, site of the new Duquesne City Center redevelopment project.

• TheMonessen Riverfront • TheGlassport Industrial IndustrialPark, located along Park, located along the Rt. 906 in theCity of Monongahela River, is Monessen, is a major home to 12 industrial brownfieldredevelopment employers. This project in its initial phase. This redevelopment project is phase encompasses 26 acres located to allow forrail, and 250,000 square feetof river, and truck access. A industrial space. The industrial large area in the northern park is home to one tenant who section of thesite remains occupies 36,000 square feet. undeveloped.

• TheDonora IndustrialPark is • The Regional Industrial the largest of all the industrial Development Corporation parks within the corridor. It is (RIDC),a quasi-public located between the borough's development agency, commercial districtand the operates a redevelopment Monongahela River, adjacent to project known as the Rt. 837. The industrial park is Duquesne City Center home to 22 businessesand the industrialpark at theformer Washington and Greene County U.S.X. Duquesne Works. Job TrainingCenter. In November 1997, construction The site is located along the began on a new access road Monongahela River which willallow industrial park adjacent to Rt. 837. At the trafficto bypass the downtown time of the survey, this area and significantly improve access to I-70 (Mon Valley Progress Council, 1998.)

24 major brownfield redevelopment housed two small companies.

25 IV. LAND RESOURCES percent along the river valley. Much of this association is A. Soil Characteristics wooded or is reverting to a woodland mix of native Soil characteristicinformation hardwoods. Largewooded lots was collected from the soil unsuitable for development exist surveys of Payette, Washington, on steepslopes along the river Greene, Westmoreland, and valley. Less sloped areasare Allegheny Counties, by the U.S. suited forfarming with Department of Agriculture limitations that include a (USDA) in conjunction with the relatively high water table and Pennsylvania State University. moderate bedrock depth. The primaryfactors determining soil variationsalong the In the streambedsof Ten Mile MonongahelaRiver are Run and Pigeon Creek in vegetation, relief, and the Washington County, the influenceof man. These factors Dormont-Culleoka-Newark have created soil associations association is common. Within which, within the study corridor, the corridor,most of the unitis consist of one to three major soils wooded or reverting back to its anda combination of several wooded state, except forcleared minor soils (Table 8). areasalong ridges commonly 1. Greene andWashington used as pastures. The less Counties sloping areasof the association are suitable forfarming which The soil profiles in Greene and was commonon level groundin Washington Counties are nearly the flood plain. Slope,erosion, identical along the river. In both occasional flooding, anda counties, Dormont-Culleokais seasonal high water table, arethe the dominant soil association major limitations formost uses. countywide and is prevalent in The bedrock depth canbe an the Monongahela River basin. It additional limitation with uses exists uninterrupted along the not associated with farming. river from the West Virginia border to the Along DunkardCreek in Greene Washington/Allegheny County County, the Glenford-Dormont­ line. This association commonly Libraryassociation is present. displays hills with manybenches This soil association consists of and ridges. Most of the hills terraces,hills, ridges and benches have fong slopes drained by with slopes up to 20 percent. small streams which have formed The common use in the corridor drainage ways between the for this association is residential hillsides. Slopes common to this and open space. association can reach up to 50

26 2. Fayette County 3. WestmorelandCounty Along the river, the Guernsey- The Philo-Monongahela-Atkins Westmoreland-Clarksburgsoil is association is located along the located in every municipality of river in North Belle Vernon Fayette County. It consists of Borough, RostraverTownship, soils influenced by limestone and and the City of Monessen. This soils underlain by the Pittsburgh association was commonly coal vein. The landscape located along the larger streams consists of rounded hilltops and a of the county andit containsa series of benches located along hardenedlayer of soil (fragipan) the slopes. The soils of this nearthe water table. The association readily accept association can be productive for fertilizer andhave good surface farmand pastureland, but it is not drainage, makingthem among used commercially in this the best soils for farmingin the capacity within the study county. Commercial, industrial, corridor. The primaryuses andresidential development, consisted of industrial, although present in some areas,is commercial, andresidential, all limited due to the soil's whichare limited by frequent permeabilityand the fine floodingand a seasonal high texturedsubsoil. water table.

The Monongahela-Philo-Atkins The Weikert association is also association is located in the located along the river in municipalities of Belle Vernon Rostraver Township. This Borough, Washington Township, association occursas steep JeffersonTownship, Brownsville escarpmentscut by the river, Borough, LuzerneTownship, with oftenexposed geologic Masontown Borough, Springhill formations. Commonly wooded Township, and Point Marion along the river, this association Borough. Soils of this contains slopes too steep forany association have formed deep type of farmingor development. alluvial deposits and are The shallowness and rockiness of commonly foundalong the thissoil also limit its uses. MonongahelaRiver, separated fromthe Guernsey- 4. Allegheny County Westmoreland-Clarksburg In Allegheny County, the Urban association by steep escarpments. Land-Philo-Rainsboro This association has severe association is foundconsistently limitations fornearly every use along both sides of the due to its seasonal high water MonongahelaRiver. The Urban table and frequentflooding. Landsoil consists of landso altered by earthmoving or so obscured by buildings or

27 structuresthat the original soil Clairton and Duquesne has a type cannot be identified. It is gentle slope which commonly found on somewhat accommodates the intense urban level land adjacent to the development. The Gilpin­ MonongahelaRiver where past Upshur-Atkins association is development has been intense for located just outside the Urban industrial, residential, and Land-Philo-Rainsboro commercial uses. association along length of the river. This association is located In areasjust outside of the river on the steep hillsides of river basin in Clairton, Duquesne, and valley. In some areas,seepage Munhall, the UrbanLand­ springs arecommon due to recent Dormont-Culleokaassociation is landslides. Being very steep, this present. Like other urbansoils, it association is mostly wooded and has been so altered by has severe limitations foruses development that the original soil other thanopen space. types could not be identified. Most of the association in

28 Table 8 Soil Associations

Soil Association Characteristics County

Dormont- Moderately well to well-drained, deep to Greene, Culleoka moderately deep, gently sloping to very steep Washington soils; on hilltops, ridges, benches, and hillsides. Glenford- Moderately well to poorly-drained, deep, Greene Dormont-Library nearly level to sloping soils, on terracesand surrounding uplands. Dormont- Well to somewhat poorly drained, deep to Greene, Culleoka-Newark moderately deep, nearly level to very steep Washington soils; on hilltops, ridges, benches, hillsides, and floodplains. Guernsey- Deep to moderately deep, well-drained to Fayette Westmoreland- poorly drained, mediumtextured, nearlylevel Clarksburg to sloping soils on streamterraces and floodplains. Monongahela- Deep, moderately well to poorly drained soils Fayette Philo-Atkins and poorly drained medium texturednearly level soils, on hilltops, ridges, benches and hillsides. Philo- Deep, moderately well-drained soils and Westmoreland Monongahela- poorly drained medium textured nearlylevel Atkins soils, on hilltops, ridges, benches and hillsides. Weikert Shallow, well drained rocky soils on Westmoreland escarpments along streams. UrbanLand- Deep, moderately well-drained soils and Allegheny Philo-Rainsboro Urban land on floodplainsand terraces. UrbanLand- Moderately deep to deep, moderately well to Allegheny Dormont- well drained soils and urbanland underlain by Culloeka shale andlimestone uplands. Gilpin-Upshur- Moderately deep, well-drained to moderately Allegheny Atkins well-drained soils and Urbanland underlain by red and grayshale on uplands, having deep poorly drained soils on floodplains. Source: Soil Surveys of Greene and Washington, Westmoreland, Fayette, and Allegheny Counties.

29 B. PrimeAgricultural Soils C. Ownership Primeagricultural soils are Most of the land within the study designated by SPRPC, these soils corridor is privately owned by have a mixture of soil and industrial companies or landscape attributes which are individuals. Both large and small best suited for agricultural companies own land related to purposes. Prime agricultural soils industrial uses such as rail are deep, with good internal corridors, mining operations, drainage, and level or nearly steel mills, coke plants, scrap level. The elements which make yards, electricalplants, storage these soil types ideal for facilities, and barge facilities. agriculture also make them an excellent soil type for development.

Within the corridor, the majority of prime agricultural soil has been developed leaving only a few pockets of undeveloped prime agricultural acres (Table 9). These undeveloped prime agricultural soil pockets are located in Dunkard Township, Greensboro, Rices Landing, Springhill Township, Brownsville Township, and Forward Scrap yard at Monongahela. Township. Figure 4 displays the location of the prime agricultural Thepublicly-owned areas along land within the study corridor as the river include parks, river indicated by SPRPC (1998). access sites, institutional buildings, and open space.

Table 9 Prime AgriculturalSoils Within Corridor

Greene Countv 976.4 Acres Fayette County 1021.7 Acres Washington County 1603.7 Acres Westmoreland 405.8 Acres County Allegheny County 221.1 Acres Total 4228. 7 Acres Source: SouthwesternPennsylvania Regional Planning Commission, 1998.

30 designations was not conducted, environmental degradation Brian Bradley of the Bureau of component" (personal AbandonedMine Reclamation communication, February 12, indicated that all of the sites 1998). identifiedprobably "contained an

35 V. WATER RESOURCES With the improved navigational system, the Monongahela Valley A. HistoricalPerspective was primed for interstate The Monongahela River has been commerce and industrial subjected to severe modifications development. Between the early over the past 150 years. As early 1800sand 1960s the as 1792, navigational Monongahela River was exposed to the most intense improvements such as the removal of large rocks andthe industrialization in the eastern construction of stone dams were United States. At one point, barges on the Monongahela taking place on the Monongahela hauled 30-40 million tons of (Miko& Lorson, 1994), but the interstate commerce annually, Monongahela Navigation more than either the Allegheny or Company, chartered by the state Ohio Rivers (Miko & Lorson, of Pennsylvania in 1837, was 1994). Theprinciple commodity responsible for the most shipped on theMonongahela significant modifications. ACOE obtained control of the River was and remains bituminous coal (M. Koryak, Pennsylvania section of the river in 1897 and between 1840 and ACOE, personal communication, 1903 the construction of a June, 1998). Intense coal mining navigational system of locks and activities throughout thebasin dams, extendingfrom Fairmont, resulted in gross abandoned mine drainage (AMD). As a result, by West Virginia to Pittsburgh the early 1900s, the 113.1 mile permanently transformed this reach of the Monongahela free-flowingriver into a series of upstream of the Youghiogheny canals and uniform pools. River was essentiallya sterile system, supportingonly the most pollution tolerant species (ACOE, 1991).

In order to fully understand the condition of the river it is important to understand the evolution of the nation's water pollutioncontrol program. Initially, human waste disposal via watercourses made water pollution control a paramount concern, but despite the requests Inside of MaxwellLock, nearMaxwell and of individual states forthe federal EastBethlehem. governmentto oversee sewage disposal, pollution control remaineda local responsibility.

36 In 1899 Congress enacted the upward trend. The following Rivers and Harbors Act which quote by Oliver Houck, a noted prohibited discharges of refuse authority on the CleanWater into navigable waterways. The Act, (cited in Percival, Miller, act's true purpose, however, was Schroeder, & Leape, 1996) to prevent interferencewith provides some insight into the interstate commerce on navigable revolutionary nature of the act waterways. Despite the growing andits extraordinary impact on severity of pollution problems, the regulation of water quality. oftenremedied only by minor regulatory actions, regulation of Warts and all, theClean Water water quality remained under the Act's NPDES program is jurisdiction of state and local America 's most successful authorities until the mid 1940s. pollution control programto date... for a mix ofreasons that Following World WarII, water include its (impossible) goals, its reliance on action-forcing pollution in the Monongahela technological standards, and its increased by several orders of watch-dogging andenforcement magnitude as steelmaking and by citizen organizations. industrial influences reigned supreme throughoutthe Unfortunately, by the early 1960s MonongahelaValley. The Water the majority of the damage had Pollution Control Acts of 1948 already occurredin the and 1956 were attempts at Monongahela. Not until the late combating the problem by 1970s had water quality in the providing federal grants for river begun to recover. These researchand the implementation improvements were a result of of state water pollution steel industry downsizing programs. In addition, the Water between 1970 and 1980, Pollution Control Acts advancesin wastewater treatment authorized the federal systems, limits on industrial government to act directly in effluents, andAMD abatement matters of interstate water technologies. As Michael pollution. Unfortunately, the Koryakfrom ACOE points out, process was complicated and the PennsylvaniaClean Streams lacked effective mechanisms to Law of 1965 andthe passage of regulate individual dischargers. the Federal SurfaceMining Control Act (SMCRA) of 1977 Not until 1972, when the Federal were importantmilestones in the Water Pollution Control Act restoration of water quality in the (now knownas the Clean Water Monongahela River. Act) was initiated, did the state of water pollution throughout the Despite the downsizing of the country andwithin the steel industry,the Monongahela Monongahelabasin begin an 37 remains primarily a commercial combined to severely degrade navigation In fact, estimates water quality andthe existing place commercial traffic biological communities increases at 1.4% annually by the (PennsylvaniaDepartment of year2050 (ACOE, 1991; Miko & Environmental Resources Lorson, 1994). It is for this [PADER], 1971; Frey, 1994). reason that sustained With the collapse of the steel improvements in water quality industry in westernPennsylvania, will remain at odds with river the Youghiogheny basin has commerce. slowly recovered, but the myriad of abandoned mines, coal fine B. Major Tributaries piles, andslag dumps continue to The Monongahela River receives releaseacidic discharges into the its greatesthydrological basin (Frey, 1994). influencefrom fourmajor tributaries: the Tygart,West Despite water pollution concerns Fork, Cheat and Youghiogheny on the Youghiogheny, its inflows Rivers. The Tygartand West benefitwater quality on the Fork arelocated in West Virginia Monongahela (ACOE, 1991). andtheir confluence at Fairmont, Low flowaugmentation from the West Virginia forms the Youghiogheny River Lake Monongahela. Within the study provides cooler water, thus corridor, two systems, the Cheat lowering temperature in both the andY oughiogheny Rivers, Youghiogheny andthe account for72% of the total Monongahela. ACOE (1991) drainage areaentering the also indicated that inflowsfrom Monongahela(Table 10, Figure the low flowaugmentation 2). The Youghiogheny provided by TygartRiver Lake originates in Marylandand the and Stonewall Jackson Lake on Cheat in West Virginia, but the the West Fork significantly majority of the Youghiogheny's influence hydrology andbenefit drainage lies within the water quality of the Pennsylvania, while only the Monongahela. mouth of the Cheat falls within Pennsylvania. Water from the Cheat River basin, which has been severely By farthe largestcontributor to degradedby AMD, appearsto the Monongahela drainage in negatively affect the Pennsylvania, the Youghiogheny Monongahela'swater quality. basin historically represented Acidic inflows fromthe Cheat some of the worst water quality River frequentlyproduce acidic conditions in the state. Intense conditions near its confluence resource extraction, industrial with the Monongahelaand landuses, and coking facilities according to ACOE (1991), periods of low flowsin Pool 7

38 result in increased acidic terrestrial andaquatic conditions. environments where the water table oftenexists at or nearthe C. Wetlands surface,or the land is inundated Wetlands can be definedas by water (Cowardin, Carter, transitional areas between Golet, LaR.oe, 1979). As such,

TABLElO Major Tributaries* to the Monongahela River Study Corridor �-I Cheat River 1423.00 WWF 89.68 DunkardCreek 235.00 WWF 87.18 Georges Creek 64.80 WWF 84.81 Jacobs Creek 7.50 WWF 83.16 Whiteley Creek 54.40 WWF 80.24 Little Whiteley Creek 9.03 WWF 78.44 Browns Run 17.90 WWF 77.16 Muddy Creek 31.70 WWF 72.92 Tenmile Creek 338.00 WWF 65.62 Dunlap Creek 41.60 WWF 56.16 Redstone Creek 109.00 WWF 54.90 Pike Run 28.60 TSF 51.36 Little Redstone Hollow 12.70 WWF 46.70 Downers Run 6.22 WWF 46.02 Speers Run 6.63 WWF 43.30 Maple Creek 10.20 WWF 42.60 Pigeon Creek 59.20 WWF 32.34 Mingo Creek 22.20 WWF 29.80 Peters Creek 51.50 TSF 19.67 Y oughi9gheny River 1764.00 WWF 15.53 Turtle Creek 148.00 WWF, delete PWS 11.52 Nine Mile Run 6.07 TSF, delete PWS 7.60 Streets Run 10.00 WWF, delete PWS 6.00

Source:11,,a�i•�ri!tk Pennsylvania Gazateer of Streamsby Pennsylvania Departmentof Environmental Protectionin cooperation withthe United States Departmentof the Interior Geological Survey, 1989, Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Departmentof Environmental Protection. 39 wetlands frequentlyexhibit a Hydrology is provided by combination of physical and overbank flowsduring flood biological characteristicsof each conditions andthrough system. Three factors are subsurfacehydraulic connections recognized as criteria forwetland to the stream itself. Periods of classification: the presence of inundation or saturation, hydric soils (soils characteristic combined with a reducing ofa reducing environment due to environment, stimulate the lack of oxygen); inundation or growth ofhydrophytic saturated conditions during part vegetation. If conditions permit, of the growingseason; anda the resulting wetlandsystems are dominanceof hydrophytic generally classifiedas emergent, (water-loving) vegetation scrub/shrub, or forestedwetlands. (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Within this general Several of the tributary waters to framework, many different the Monongahela arealso wetlandecosystems and classifiedas riverine systems. classificationsexist. Located between the Conrail freightyard and the Decades ofurban development MonongahelaRiver in andgrowth along the Blainsburg, the Blainsburg Monongahelafloodplain has Floodplain Biological Diversity significantlyreduced the number Area provides exceptional ofwetlands within the study wetland habitat fornative corridor. As a result, wetlands vegetation andwildlife. This occurring within the study region is best characterizedas a corridor aregenerally small and recovering floodplain forestand foundprimarily along shorelines scrub/shrub wetlandcommunity. and tributarymouths. Riverine or floodplainwetlands Wetlands occupying the study performseveral functionswithin corridor were identifiedthrough the Monongahelabasin. Two of a review ofNational Wetlands the most importantinclude the Inventory (NWI) andSPRPC retention andgradual release of mapping. Figure 4 illustrates the floodwatersand bank locations of these systems within stabilization. Wetlandsretard the study corridor. floodsby slowing the movement ofwater through the wetland, Within the study corridor, the increasing retention time, and Monongahela River is classified allowing water to infiltratethe as a riverine wetlandon NWI soil. When floodwatersrecede, mapping. Riverine wetlands these wetlands functionto occur infloodplains and riparian gradually release stored water corridors that areclosely back to the river. Along with associated with waterways. forestedand scrub/shrub riparian

40 corridors, the root systems D. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation associated with herbaceous and Despite the industrialized nature scrub/shrub wetland vegetation of the Monongahela, it is anchor the otherwise unstable interesting to note that anACOE sandand alluvial soils of the (1991) study indicated that the riverbank. MonongahelaRiver supports almost all of the aquatic beds of Expansive areas of other wetland submerged aquatic plants within types do not occur within the the navigable waters of the study corridor due to the steep Pittsburgh District (this includes slopes and topographicrelief the Allegheny and Ohio Rivers). surroundingthe river valley. The These beds are significantly existence of smaller systems (less concentrated in the upper than 10 acres) within the study Monongahela throughout West corridoris highly probable Virginia andin Pool 3 in however. These systems would Pennsylvania; and establish the most likely be of two types, slope Monongahelaas a unique anddepressional wetlands. ecological resource within the Ohio River navigation system. Slope wetlandsoccur in areasof groundwaterdischarge. These The rarityof submerged aquatic discharges oftenoccur when the vegetation within thethree rivers downwardflow of groundwater alone establishes this habitat type meets an impermeable layer of as a unique resource. Submerged rock material. The flowof aquatic vegetation also provides groundwateris then diverted valuable spawning andcover horizontally until it reaches the habitat formany forage feeder soil surface along a hillside. fish. Spring seeps andsphagnum moss wetlands arecommon examples. E. Floodplains The one-hundred andfive­ Depressional wetlands may also hundred yearfloodplains are occur withinthe study corridor in generally narrow andrestricted topographical basins. The by the steep slopes that border accumulation of surface water much of the MonongahelaRiver into depressions with constricted within the study corridor. Still, or nonexistent outlets is one of there areareas at risk for the defining characteristics. floodingat locations like Point These depressional systems are Marion, Greensboro, East oftenoverlooked, rangingin size Bethlehem, West Brownsville, froma fewsquare yards to Brownsville, California,Coal several acres. Center, andMcKeesport (Figure 4). As evidenced by historical floodevents on the Monongahela

41 River, these low-lying areasoften the ACOE, Pittsburgh District sustain significantproperty office. damage. F. Water Quality Flood management andinsurance rates are coordinated through the 1. Prevailing Concerns National Flood Insurance While much is known about Program. This program,which individual pollutantspecies and was established by the National sources in the Monongahela Flood Insurance Act of1968 and River, an overall understanding the Flood Disaster Protection Act of the impact ofwater pollution of1973, was aneffort to reduce is significantly limited. the damageand hazards associated with floodevents. To According to Smith, Alexander, accomplish these goals, the & Lanfear, (1994) Federal Emergency Management comprehensive, valid, and Agency (FEMA), conducts reliable water quality data at the routine floodinsurance studies watershed level is currentlyon which investigate the severity the frontier ofacademic and and existence of floodhazards governmentalagency reporting. throughout the country. The For this reason compiling a results of thesestudies arethen useful description ofwater used to develop risk data that can quality conditions within the then be applied duringland use MonongahelaRiver study planning andfloodplain corridor is complicated by development. numerous limitations because reliable, regional data does not In addition to the flood hazard exist formany aspects ofwater data provided by FEMA, the quality. In addition, National Weather Service (NWS) comprehensive networks of operates river forecastpoints at sampling locations, which are several locations along the necessaryfor analyzing trends Monongahela River. River stage andcorrelations are often absent. information is available through recorded messages, theNWS The primaryreason for the lack internet site ofcomprehensiveness is that (www.nws.noaa.gov\er\pitt), and water quality monitoring and National Oceanic and research is technically Atmospheric Administration demanding, labor intensive, and (NOAA) weather radio. ACOE expensive (Smith et al., 1994). also maintains copies ofFEMA Anotherdifficulty associated studies and related flood hazard with water quality monitoring is investigations. This information the requirement ofa continued as well as other floodhazard researcheffort. Collection of assistanceis available through 42 data at a discrete point in time the EPA has said that the state of offerslittle informationregarding currentwater quality data is so the trends and dynamicsof water poor that no objective, overall quality parameters. Several years answer can be provided to the of data are needed in order to question of whether water quality more completely evaluate the within the major basins effects of environmental factors, [including the Monongahela] is and to discriminate between short trending upwardor downward andlong term sources of (cited in Percival, 1996). The variability. available data includes chemical samples froma regionally Furthercomplicating the diverse area, permitted effluent difficultiesassociated with dischargesand water uses, toxic monitoring programs is the trace metal andorganic species determination of which water concentrationsin vertebrate quality indicators are appropriate. tissue, andmacroinvertebrate and Describing the differentaspects fishcommunity compositions. of water quality is generally Data forthese indicatorsis often achieved through a myriad of random, both temporally and indicators, rangingfrom algal geographically, and analysisis species to aquatic.invertebrate difficultat best due to population dynamicsto studies of inconsistencies between chemical species composition. individual sampling protocols. According to Smith et al. (1994), indicators range fromthose that 2. Existing Indicators andData are specificand narrowly focused,like individual chemical a) Chemical Standards and or bacterial concentrations, to Assessment those that are integrative and Section 303 of the CleanWater broadly focused, such as anindex Act of 1972 requires that states of biological health foran entire adopt specificwater quality community ecosystem. Ideally, a standardsthat include uses watershed-based analysis of designatedfor their waterbodies water quality for the (Percival et al., 1996). These Monongahela River study standardsspecify maximum corridor would include a ambientlevels of pollutantsthat combination of indicators will ensure that waters canbe selected fromall points along used fortheir designated this spectrum. purposes. Water uses andlevels of specificchemical parameters Unfortunately, this ideal rangeof are to be protected and indicators does not exist for the maintained with thegoal of MonongahelaRiver because eliminating andpreventing water federal,state, andlocal databases pollution. A synopsis of areoften compromised. In fact, 43 Pennsylvania'sdesignated water body did not support current uses includes fishand aquatic uses). life; public, industrial, livestock, wildlife, andirrigational water Throughout the United States, supply; andboating, fishing, nonpoint sources arethe greatest water contact sports, aesthetics, source of water quality andrecreational uses (Frey, degradation(Conservation 1996). Foundation cited in Percival et al., 1996) and the Monongahela In accordancewith section 303, basin is no exception. Nonpoint the major goal of Pennsylvania's source pollution is an expansive Water Quality Assessment source that is perhaps the most Programis to evaluate whether difficultto measure andhighly these water quality standardsare variabledue to climatic being met. Data fromthe variances. Nonpoint sources are program is compiled and those that cannotbe traced to a presented to Congressand the specificpoint of dischargeor public in accordance with section origin. Of the 1200 r.m. assessed 305(b) of the Clean Water Act in the 1994 Water Quality (1972) which requires states to Assessment Report, over 400 conduct biennial water quality were indicated as being degraded assessments on the condition of and the overwhelmingsource of their waterways andreport on this degradation was nonpoint these- findings. source impacts, accounting for over 350 r.m. In the 1994 and1996 Water Quality Assessment Reports Historically, the number one (Frey, 1994, 1996), nonpoint source impact approximately 1200 r.m.'s within throughout the Monongahela the MonongahelaRiver subbasin basin has been fromresource were evaluated. For 1994 and extractionin the formof AMD. 1996, respectively, 745 and 780 In fact,PAD EP reported that r.m. were fully supporting (i.e. AMDwas responsible forthe currently supporting the existing degradation of close to 300 r.m. designated water uses), 207 and (70.6%) within the Monongahela 200 r.m. were partially drainage (Frey, 1994). supporting (i.e. only partial attainment was achieved due to AMD involves a complex set of an observed impairment in fish chemical reactions but begins by and aquatic life), and216 and exposing sulfidesto oxygen 223 r.m. were identified as not during the mining process. supporting (i.e. data, direct Sulfidesalmost invariably occur observation, and professional within bituminous coal seams,in judgmentindicated that the water rocks andclays surrounding the seams,and within roof shales. 44 Typically in the mineral form is formed. pyrite or marcasite (FeSi), exposure to oxygen oxidizes the The sediments produced by AMD pyrite andliberates sulfate ions can cause aesthetic damage, clog (So/-), hydrogen ions (Ir),and the gills of aquatic organisms, and ferrous iron(Fe 2+). The sulfate increase toxic levels of metals. and hydrogen ions constitute the However, the most damaging components of the familiar component of AMD is the compound sulfuric acid (HiSO4). production of sulfuricacid which is acutely toxic to all aquatic Further oxidationof the ferrous organisms (Manahan, 1994). iron is often facilitatedby iron bacterium such as Thiobacillus Althoughindividual sites were ferrooxidans, Metallogenium not identified, data from spp., Thiobacillus thiooxidans, PADEP's Water Quality andBacillus ferrooxidans Assessment Reports indicated a (Manahan, 1994). The additional random distribution of mine oxidation has two consequences. discharges throughout the First, the conversion of Fe2+ to Monongahela's watershed Fe3+ causes the pyrite to further including: 110.0 r.m. of the dissolve, thus perpetuating the Youghiogheny basin, 26 r.m. in cycle. Second, the ferricacid the Redstone Creek basin, 22 r.m. + (Fe(H2O)/ ) remains in solution in the Peters Creek basin, 22 r.m. onlyat a very low pH (<3). on Turtle Creek, 20 r.m. in the When dilutedby receiving waters, Georges Creek basin, 13 r.m. on the pH rises, Fe(OH)3 the Big Sandy Creek, 12 r.m. on precipitates, and the familiar Whiteley and Little Whiteley yellow-orange sediment found in Creeks, and 10 r.m. on Dunkard so many Pennsylvania waterways

45 Creek (Frey, 1994, 1996). 702), and Point Marion (WQN 725). WQN stations are also The remaining significant located on the Monongahela's sources of degradation were two largesttributaries, the Cheat identified by PADEP as River nearits confluence (WQN municipal point sources (28 727) andthe Youghiogheny r.m.), naturalchemical and River at Sutersville (WQN 706). physical changes(27 r.m.), Water quality data fromthese miscellaneousnonpoint sources stations is contained in Appendix (20 r.m.), septic systems (16 E. Informationobtained at each r.m.), industrial point sources (10 location is used in assessing the r.m.), storm sewers (6 r.m.), quality of surfacewater, atmospheric deposition (5 r.m.), identifyingtrends, and evaluating combined sewer overflows( 4 the effectivenessof the Water r.m.), andagriculture (1.5 r.m.). Quality ManagementProgram (Shertzer & Schreffler, 1996). As a result of the overwhelming Results between 1984 and1992 influenceof AMD, the indicated several positive trends MonongahelaRiver watershed as illustrated in Table 11. has been listed as a High Priority Watershed on the Nonpoint Trends foralkalinity areperhaps Source (NPS) Priority Degraded the most encouraging. As Watershed List (DWL) under the discussed, theprimary source of PADEP's Nonpoint Source degradationwithin the Control Program(Frey, 1994, Monongahela basin is AMD. 1996). The NPS DWL identifies Alkalinity serves to bufferthe streamsor streamsegments that input of acidic solutions, so areimpacted by nonpoint sources increases aregenerally indicative of pollution. PADEP uses of improving water quality. informationabout the amountof Concentrationsof manganese degradation in conjunction with were decreasing at WQN's 702 interest fromthe public and local and 725, but were increasing at groups in order to assess WQN 706. Manganese, although watersheds that are most likely to sparselystudied, is a toxic metal benefit from remediation at high concentrations andAMD projects. constituent. The reported toxicity of manganesein most In addition to water quality freshwateraquatic lifevaries assessment reports, P ADEP widely between 0.3-2700 mg/1. maintains hundreds of fixed Iron displayed anupward trend Water Quality Network (WQN) only at WQN 706 on the stations throughout the state. Youghiogheny River. Increases WQN stations arelocated on the in total iron oftenindicate the MonongahelaRiver at Braddock influenceof AMD, so increases (WQN 701), Charleroi(WQN are of concern. Similarly, 46 increases in aluminum, a toxic provides only a summary of metal, indicate the effects of cumulative effectsthroughout the acidic inputs. Thereforethe entire river system. Furthermore, aluminum increase at WQN 727, because only one sample location the Cheat River, arealso of exists, it is difficultto make concern. further conclusions fromthis limited data set. Appendix E Similarto the P ADEP WQN, the contains the water chemistry data United States Geological Survey for 1996 and 1997 at the (USGS) operates the National Braddock site. Water Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) which began As part of a study examining the in 1991. This program was Monongahela's navigational designed to collect consistent system fromLocks and Dams water quality data, report on the No. 2 to 4, ACOE (1991) status and trends of water investigated existing water resources, and identify factors quality between r.m. 4.5 and that affect water quality 56.2. Several specificwater throughout the United States. To quality parameterswere meet these objectives, the USGS measured between 1975 and established approximately 60 . 1990. Results indicated elevated study units, or major watersheds, temperatures, reduced dissolved throughout the country. oxygen, elevated iron and sulfate Information is then collected concentrations, high levels of regarding the physical, chemical, turbidity and dissolved solids as and biological condition of the the main issues affecting existing watershed. water quality in the lower Monongahela. In 1994, studies began within the Allegheny-Monongahela River According to ACOE (1991) the Basin. NAWQA maintains only construction of the locks and one water chemistry sample dams resulted in isolated pools station on the Monongahela that have become more sensitive River at Braddock, PA. to tributary flowsand industrial Although still in the preliminary effluents. For instance, the stages of data collection, early Monongahela exhibits a warming results indicate AMD as the most trend from upstreamto significantsource of water downstream. Two large fossil quality degradation (USGS, fuel generators, Duquesne 1997a; D. Williams, USGS, Light's Elrama Plant and West personal communication, Penn Power's Mitchell Plant, are December 10, 1997). Due to the responsible formassive volumes sample station's downstream of heated thermal discharges orientation within the watershed, totaling 273 and 146 million data collected at this site gallons per day, respectively (R. 47 TABLE11 Monongahela River Water Quality Network: Summary of Selected Water Quality Chemical Parameters (1984-1992)

701 0.80 -0.010

702 0.50 -12.0

725 0.93 0.01 -16.3

727 96.7

706 1.00 0.02 8.0 96.0

Source: Commonwealthof Pennsylvania 1994 Water QualityAssessment (Section 305(b), Federal Clean Water Act) by R. F. Frey, 1994, Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Departmentof Environmental Protection.

Ludlow, USGS, personal Because water temperature is communication, December 1, negatively correlated with levels 1997). In fact,increased of dissolved oxygen these electrical demands during a regions of elevated water drought in 1988, combined with temperature correspond with low flow conditions, resulted in lower levels of dissolved oxygen. · recorded water temperatures as The combination of increased high as 100° F within Pool 3 (r.m. water temperature and 23.8) (ACOE, 1991). wastewater inputs between r.m. 30.0 and r.m. 16.7 resulted in a Combined, these power plants significant1.6 mg/1 decrease in extract and discharge dissolved oxygen concentration approximately 7 times the (ACOE, 1991). This type of amount of water used by all dissolved oxygen decrease can public water suppliers within the place significantstress on fish study corridor. populations, resulting in

48 increases in mortality and the lack ofavailable information decreases in fecundityrates. but two in particular,associated costs and labor intensity, Studies ofalgal abundanceon the prohibit, comprehensive Lower Monongahela between macroinvertebrate studies. In 1975 and1988 indicated higher addition, the size anddepth of phytoplankton concentrations at the MonongahelaRiver downstreamlocations (ACOE, introduces a series oflogistical 1991). Algal concentrations are difficultiesrelated to the closely tied to nutrient sampling procedure itself. concentrations and water temperature. This finding The most recent and correlateswith the observed comprehensive temperature increases in the macroinvertebrate study lower reaches of the identifiedwas conducted in 1989 Monongahela, as well as an by Finni ( cited in U.S. Fish and increase in wastewater discharge. WildlifeService [USFWS], 1991) on the lower 42 miles of Very little data existed regarding the Monongahela. Results ofthis volatile organiccompounds investigation indicated a "diverse (VOC's) in the Monongahela. invertebrate community'' ACOE (1991) did indicate that represented by 139 distinct taxa through reaeration, the locks and including 72 species ofinsects dams network provided andcrustaceans and54 taxa of substantial strippingofVOC's segmentedworms and leeches. between the water-air interface. Due to the ratio oftaxa collected Exactly how this process which areconsidered intolerant functionedwas unclearand of organicpollutants and low pH researchers pointed out that the levels, and the observed species data sets were too limited to richness, Finni concluded that make sound conclusions. evidence ofsubstantial improvement within the benthic b) Biological Indicators and community existed. Although Assessment these results areencouraging and As cited, descriptive data represent markedimprovements regardingthe biological integrity in this aspect of water quality, ofthe MonongahelaRiver the robustnessof these ecosystem is highlyinadequate conclusions is somewhat fora number ofdifferent reasons. compromised by thelack ofan Comprehensive data sets established biological reference regarding macroinvertebrate condition and non-relianceon an composition forthe study accepted bioassessment protocol. corridor arescarce. There are several factors that contribute to Assessments offish populations in the MonongahelaRiver have 49 revealed encouraging trends over As was the case with other water the past 40 years. In fact, a quality indicators forthe management report from the Monongahela, Miko andLorson PennsylvaniaFish and Boat (1994) pointed out that more Commission (PFBC) described consistent, rigorous sampling the changesin species protocols need to be composition since 1957 as implemented to provide a greater "miraculous" (Miko & Lorson, understandingof fishpopulation 1994). This report cites the dynamics. collection of only two fishfrom the Monongahelain a 1957 Due to the industrialized population study. By 1994, characterof the Monongahela, gamefish such as walleye, sediment contamination is a smallmouth bass, and sauger recurringwater quality concern. (once considered rarethroughout Much attention has been given to the Monongahela) exhibited the phenomenon of increased fecundity rates and bioaccumulation and represented a viable sportfishery. biomagnificationof toxins within Increases in gamefish fishand crustaceanspecies. populations have been Toxic compounds include heavy complemented by the appearance metals such as cadmium and of five Pennsylvaniacandidate or chromium; organohalide "nearendangered status" species. pesticides includingaldrin, Table 12 lists species dieldrin andchlordane; composition results from PFBC polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) sampling effortsconducted like askarel;polycyclic aromatic between 1988 and 1991. hydrocarbons(PAC) such as benzene; andvolatile solid As cited by ACOE (1991) material. Manyof these additional fishstudies have been compounds areinsoluble in water conducted by the Ohio River andsubsequently concentratein Valley Water Sanitation bottom sediments andanimal Commission (ORSANCO) tissue. However, comprehensive (1967-1988), Ecological monitoringnetworks arecostly Analysts, Inc. (1977-1978), NUS andlimited in scope. Corporation (1981-1982), and USFWS (1984-1988). These In response to humanhealth investigations have indicated concernsand the obvious similarspecies composition and ecological implications abundance results with the upper associated with contaminants, reaches showing less PADEP beganthe Water Quality improvement thanthe lower Toxics ManagementStrategy. Monongahela, most likely the Monitoring was startedin 1976 result of AMOinfluence. andincludes routine samplingof fishtissues for a variety of 50 toxins. The most recent reports contain conswnption advisories fors everal fishs pecies in the Monongahela and Cheat Rivers (Table 13). Due to chemical concentrations foundin the fillets of these species, these advisories were designated as "do not eat" byPADEP.

51 TABLE12 Fish Species Composition for the Monongahela River Sections 04-06 (Lock & Dam No. 3 to The Point)

Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Spotted bass Micopterus punctulatus White crappie Pomoxis annularis Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Walleye Stizostedion vitreum v. Sauger Stizostedion canadense Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Tiger muskellunge Esox masquinongy Flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris Channelcatfish Ictalurus punctatus White bass Marone chrysops Yellow perch Perea flavescens White x striped bass M chrysops x M saxatilis Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus Gizzard shad Dorosoma copedianum Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides Mooneye Hiodon tergisus Quillback Carpoides cyprinus Common carp Cyprinus carpio Northernhog sucker Hypentelium nigricans Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum River redhorse Moxostoma carinatum

Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum Shorthead redhorse Moxostoma macrolepidotum Logperch Percina caprodes Skipjack herring Pomolobus chrysochloris Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis Warmouth* , ,"!Speciesinboltl�rg,i;�s , l,samp,led,in'Sectiotfs�O�t Source: Monongahela River (819 A&C)Management Report,Sections 04-06 by D. A. Miko and R. D. Lorson, 1994, Bellefonte: PA: Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission.

52 TABLE 13 Fish Consumption Advisories within the Monongahela River Basin

', , , ,. .'·,. ', 'J�y.aterli°-ijY,, ; .· l,..ocation,, >. Spe�ies.·,: ·. :,�Q�nt".:r;;.}1 Monongahela r.m. 90.8 White Bass, Carp Chlordane, PCB Monongahela r.m. 61.2 Channel Catfish, Chlordane, PCB Carp, Smallmouth Bass Monongahela r.m. 11.2 Smallmouth Bass, PCB Spotted Bass, Walleye, Freshwater Drum, Carp,Channel Catfish Cheat River Confluence White Bass Chlordane Sources: Commonwealth of Pennsylvama 1996 Water Quality Assessment (Section 305(b), Federal Clean Water Act) by R. F. Frey, 1996, Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Departmentof Environmental Protection. 1998 Pennsylvania Summaryof Fishing Regulationsand Laws by Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, 1998a, Bellefonte,PA: Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission.

In 1990, ACOE conducted an The combination of elevated analysisof bottom sediments for temperatures andincreased priority pollutants within the nutrient levels can have serious navigational channel between health implications for r.m. 23.8 and41.4. Sample recreational water use on the locations were selected which river. Two species of potentially presumably represented ''worst­ dangerousthermophilic (heat­ case" areasand analyzed for a loving) organismsare known to variety of contaminants. Results occurwithin Pool 3. indicated that bottom sediments These organisms areespecially fromthe Pool 3 navigation abundant in warmwaters with channelare "remarkably clean" increased bacterial of EPA priority pollutants concentrations(K. Talaro & A. (ACOE, 1990). In addition, Talaro, 1993). Schizothrix ACOE pointed out that there calcicola, a species of algae, was were no indications that the found to occur in high densities sediments at Locks andDam No. by ACOE (1991). This blue­ 2 and 4 would yield significant green algae produces an exotoxin levels of contamination. Near similarto those producedby the shore finesediments were not agents of botulism, diphtheria, addressed in this 1990 study. and tetanusand has been blamed for isolated water supply epidemics (ACOE, 1991).

53 According to Talaroet al. (1993) majority of these odors canbe the protozoa Naegleria fowleri, is removed with proper water knownto infectswimmers, treatment, this condition boaters, andwater skiers seriously detractsfrom the worldwide through direct water­ aesthetic appealof the river. mucous membranecontact. Decreases in transparencyand Although infectionsare rare, concurrentincreases in turbidity recreational water users areat between r.m. 56.2 and0.8 have risk forcontracting primaryacute also been blamedon the observed meningoencephalitis, an increases in algal colonies, invariablylethal condition suspended materials, andprop resulting fromthe massive wash from commercial destruction of brain tissue. navigation in the lower Monongahela(ACOE, 1991). One result of increased temperatures andsewage nutrient 3. EffluentDischarge concentrations are 'blooms', or Section 402 of the Clean Water explosions in growthrates of Act of 1972 establishes a blue-green algae andcertain national permit program,the protozoans. The productivity National Pollution Discharge associated with these blooms has Elimination System (NPDES), significantimpacts on the river that may be administered by the ecosystem. During daylight EPA or by individual states as hours algaeproduce energy via delegated by the EPA. photosynthesis. At night Essentially, the NPDES permit however, algal metabolism programtranslates general requires the input of oxygen from effluentlimitations into specific the surrounding waters. Aquatic obligations of a discharger. systems with high concentrations Thus, " ... the dischargeof any of algae may become depleted of pollutantby anyperson shall be oxygen which is essential to fish unlawful"except as specifically and other aquatic life. If the permitted by the regulatory cycle persists, the demand for agency (Percival et al., 1996). dissolved oxygen may become so great that anaerobicconditions (i. Effluentdischargers in the study e. in the absence of freeoxygen) corridor were identifiedthrough will result. a review of P ADEP andUSGS NPDES databases (USGS, During the summer months, 1997b; K. Halloran,PADEP, certain species associated with personal communication, algal blooms can become so November 24, 1997). A totalof abundantthat offensiveodors 215 active permitswere andtastes have oftenoccurred identifiedfor the study corridor within the river and at municipal (Appendix E). Although the water authorities. Although the 54 majority of these permits are owned Approximately 50 percent of by industrialand municipal/sewage Westmoreland County'sriverfront is treatment facilities, several were serviced, but Rostraver Township, issued to private individuals and retail which accounts for the remaining 50 businesses. PADEP (1998) indicated percent, is un-sewered. All of the thatof the 215 active permits, 23 riverfront in Washington County effluent violations had occurred except West Brownsville, Centerville, during 1997 (Table 14). and Elco Boroughs, is covered by municipal service. Public wastewater or sanitary treatment facilities within the study Less populated, and more rural in corridor were identifiedfr om NPDES nature, Fayette and Greene Counties databases, and sewer service area aresi gnificantlylacking in service mapping for the study corridor was coverage. As shown by Figure 5, obtained from the SPRPC. As approximately 90 percent of the depicted in Figure 5, the more riverfront in these counties is not industrialized, heavily populated covered by municipal treatment regions of the lower Monongahela service. tend to have greater service coverage. With theexception of portions of Inaddition to permitted discharges, Forward Township, the majority of one of the most significantpollutant the riverfront in Allegheny County is sources in termsof human health covered by municipal treatment risks is the unauthorized discharge of service. untreated sewage. Despite the strict regulations against unpermitted pollutant discharges under the Clean Water Act and

55 Pennsylvania's Sewage Facilities discharges include increased Act (PA Act 537), many nutrientlevels (nitratesand communities within the study phosphates), higher turbidity, corridor remain out of sedimentation, decreases in compliance. Concentrated dissolved oxygen levels and primarilyin the less increases in pathogenic bacteria. industrialized areas of Fayette andGreene Counties, on-lot According to PADEP there are septic systems or direct 'wildcat' numerous municipalities and lines, are:frequently observed. unincorporated towns that relied These allow untreated sewage solely upon on-lot septic systems and septic system leachate to or direct 'wildcat' lines to the enter directly into the river. river (B. Santmeyer,PADEP, Possible outcomes of these personal communication, July

TABLE 14 EffluentViolations for Major Dischargers to the Monongahela River (1/97-12/97)

R4i ,,i, --=:,- !¾'' -m-e-,,c;-('<>:, .,,, ' \½l<",,?:':f!"'R:t�"tnloiDffli!i ,.,.., . ¼';<,:,..;,.,,�.c:---,i/',,;.¾,: -�,1D!!llt¾% ,, --111,, ' Hercules, Inc. Jefferson Allegheny pH Wheeling-Pgh Steel Allenport Washington Oil/Grease Wheeling-Pgh Steel Allenport Washington Total Suspended Solids Duquesne Light-Elrama Elrama Washington pH West Penn Power-Mitchell Monongahela Washington Total Suspended Solids, Oil/Grease,pH West Penn Power-Mitchell Monongahela Washington Total Boron West Penn Power-Mitchell Monongahela Washington Total Suspended Solids U.S.X. Corporation Clairton Allegheny Total Suspended Solids U.S.X. Corporation Clairton Allegheny pH U.S.X. Corporation Clairton Allegheny Napthalene LTV Steel Company Pittsburgh Allegheny Temperature California Borough California Washington Flow Elizabeth Sanitary Authority Buena Vista Allegheny Total Suspended Solids Monongahela Municipal Monongahela Washington Total Suspended Solids Authority Mon Valley Sewer Authority Donora Washington Flow West MifflinMunicipal West Mifflin Allegheny Fecal Coliform West MifflinMunicipal West Mifflin Allegheny Fecal Coliform Charleroi Municipal Charleroi Washington Total Suspended Solids Duquesne City Duquesne Allegheny Fecal Coliform ElizabethBoro Municipal Elizabeth Allegheny Total Suspended Solids U.S.X. Corporation NorthBraddock Allegheny Zinc U.S.X. Corporation North Braddock Allegheny Oil/Grease U.S.X. Corporation North Braddock Allegheny Oil/Grease Source: [NPDESLumts and EffluentViolations], Unpubhshed data by Pennsylvania DepartmentofEnvrronmental Protection, 1998. 56 17, 1997). Many of these areas Locks and Dam No. 3, which have attempted to receive grants accounts for approximately 45 to construct treatmentplants or acres of exceptional value habitat, link with existing sewer lines in has been identifiedby USFWS as the area under Pennsylvania's a "Resource Category 2" Sewage Facilities Act, but have (ACOE, 1991). Resources of been unsuccessful. this type represent systems which perform vital functionsat the 4. Navigational Demands population, community, or It has been emphasized that in ecosystem levels. spite of enormous changes in water quality legislation and public attitude, the Monongahela River remains first and foremost, a commercial navigation river. The sheer magnitude of annual river commerce on the Monongahela illustratesthis point (Table 15).

With an expected increase in river commerce of approximately 60% by the year 2050 and the condition of antiquated navigational structures on the Monongahela River, ACOE (1991) conducted a feasibility analysis for the rehabilitation and/or replacement of Locks and Dams No's. 2 through4. Although not discussed in detail here, ACOE stated thatthe most significantimpacts to aquatic habitat would result fromthe removal of Locks and Dam No. 3., as a result of the loss of oxygen exchange processes due to reaeration of water flowing over thedam. As suggested, this would decrease dissolved oxygen concentrationsbelow Locks and Dam No. 3 and create an uninterrupted pool zone between r.m. 11.3 and 41.5. Inaddition, the tailwaterzone associated with

57 TABLE15 River Commerce on the Monongahela River(1951-1989)

' ;:/;>' · •,• · ·y .· .ear '·'·. · < . ,.•'MiQiops· of.if;ons :�/{� 1951 32.0 1955 37.6 1960 29.5 1965 38.8 1970 42.3 1975 37.3 1980 34.3 1981 32.1 1982 28.8 1983 26.5 1984 34.5 1985 28.8 1986 32.4 1987 32.9 1989 38.4 2000 48.1 2010 52.9 2020 55.7 2030 64.6 2040 71.1 2050 78.7 ))i{fe�::ifr,�oi

Along with direct loss of aquatic • destruction of habitat, impacts from the project macroinvertebrate may include: communities andfish spawning areasduring • loss of fishing opportunity dredging andaccess • contamination from • damageto upland wildlife hazardousand toxic wastes habitat at disposal sites during dredging • indirect loss of wetland systems

58 ACOE, in conjunction with state fromthe Monongahela River and federal agencies, has (Table 16). Cumulatively, these developed mitigation strategies facilitiesextract approximately to compensate for unavoidable 5 8 million gallons per day and adverse impacts. supplied over 1.6 million homes (G. Wobert, PADEP, personal 5. Summary communication, December 17, Over the past 50 yearsmany 1997). This amount of daily notable improvements in water extraction appearssignificant but pollution control have been when viewed in termsof the total realized on the Monongahela river volume (at Braddock) it River, but the Monongahela will becomes a relatively small never be restored to its pristine amount. For example, according state. Nevertheless, the to the USGS (1988) riverflow MonongahelaRiver is far from volume at Braddock averages achieving its highest attainable approximately 12,430 cubic feet state of ecosystem functioning. per second (cfs). This translates In fact,Miko andLorson (1994) into almost 335 million gallons have described the Monongahela per hour (mgh) which is more as "in a state of transition". thansufficient to meet the needs of public water suppliers. As Despite enormousexpenditures ACOE points out, volumes on water pollution controls, the upstream are significantlyless. overall record of water quality At Charleroi, for example, river improvement within the volume decreases to 650 cfs, MonongahelaRiver is mixed. translatingto 17.5 mgh (C. According to Percival et al. Weiser, ACOE, personal (1996) "the Federal Clean Water communication,June, 1998). Act has kept levels of many water pollutants substantially Water service areamapping for below what they would otherwise the study region was obtained be". Nonetheless, water fromSPRPC andis contained in pollution problems remain Figure5. Service areason Figure throughout the Monongahela 5 representexisting water supply River, primarily as a result of lines with a 'buffered' region of nonpoint source pollution, coverage of approximately 350 navigational demands, combined feet. Water service was sewer overflows, industry, and determinedby comparing the dischargesfrom 'wildcat' sewers. bufferedcoverage areaswith communities andresidences as G. Water Supply indicated on USGS 7.5 minute There are fourteenpublic water series quadrangles. intakes within the study corridor which withdraw surfacewater

59 TABLE 16 Public Water Suppliers with Intakes on the Monongahela River

Point Marion Borough Water Service 1,400 117,000 90.0 East Dunkard Water Association 3,400 400,000 88.1 Dunkard Valley Joint Municipal 1,400 100,000 85.5 Masontown Boro Waterworks 3,900 500,000 79.0 Carmichaels Municipal Water Authority 3,900 300,000 75.0 Southwestern PA Water Authority 34,000 4,000,000 71.2 Tri-County Joint Municipal Authority 7,400 1,000,000 64.5 PA American Water-Brownsville 15,000 1,500,000 57.1 Newell Municipal Authority 700 350,000 50.6 Washington Twp. Municipal 8,200 1,322,000 46.0 Belle VernonMunicipal Water Authority 5,000 500,000 44.1 Charleroi Boro Authority 30,000 6,000,000 42.7 PA American Water-Elrama 800,000 6,000,000 42.7 PA American Water-Hays Mine 700,000 36,000,000 4.5 Total 1,614,300 58,089,000 Source: G. Wobert, PADEP, personal communication, December 17, 1997.

A total of26 public water coverages. Although not suppliers servicethe study identifiedas residences, there are corridor population, however, as isolated buildings indicated on Table 16 indicates, only 14 of USGS mapping that areoutside these withdraw water directly of water service coverage areas fromthe Monongahela. The in all fivestudy corridor remaining facilitiesobtain their counties. water fromother facilities, throu_gh groundwatersupplies, or Table 17 lists non-public water through purchase fromother withdrawal fromthe facilities. MonongahelaRiver within the study corridor. Cumulatively, With the exception of isolated these eight facilitieswithdraw residences in ForwardTownship, approximately 9 times as much all of the riverfrontcommunities surfacewater from the river as in Allegheny County are within public suppliers. On a daily public water supply coverage. basis these extractions are Similarly,all of the riverfront marginallywithin the hydrologic communities within means of the river but as cited Westmoreland, Washington, under the Water Quality section, Greene, andFayette Counties, the returnof heated waters from are within water service the Elramaand Mitchell plants

60 TABLE 17 Non-Public Water Withdrawal from the Monongahela River

Cumberland 27,700,000 Union 273,000,000 Union 146,000,000

2,870,000 65,300,000 11,300,000 788,000 ��tifril'ii£i9�:1".i', Source: R. Ludlow, USGS, personal communication,December 1, 1997.

has severe deleterious effects on the Monongahela River basin are aquatic ecosystem. regulated by five major reservoirs including, Stonewall Discharge rates within the Jackson Lake on theWest Fork,

61 Tygart Lake on the Tygart River, Youghiogheny River Lakeand Deep Creek Lakeon the Youghiogheny River, andLake Lynn on the Cheat River (ACOE, 1991). The first three reservoirs are maintained and operated by ACOE. Designed uses of these reservoirs included recreation, fishing, floodcontrol, andlow­ flow augmentation to enhance water quality and navigational capabilities during drought conditions. Deep Creek Lake andLake Lynn are both privately owned by power generating facilitiesand do not performany low flowregulation.

62 VI. BIOLOGICAL recently, largetracts of forest RESOURCES land have been altered to make way forhomes, businesses, A. Vegetation highways andother developments. When the first settlers entered the Monongahela Valley andthe The MonongahelaValley is surrounding region, the most classifiedas a partof the North prominent feature was the AmericanDeciduous Hardwood immense acreage of virgin forest. Forest Type. The entire area This seemingly endless tractof consists primarily of second and forestwas then known as "The third growth mature deciduous Great Forest" or the "Black forest. The upland areaslocated Forest of America". It has been along the hillsides andridges of determined that the Great Forest the valley contain white and contained more species of trees northernred oak(Quercus alba; thanany where else in North Quercus rubra), maple (Acer America (Bissell, 1952). A few spp. ), birch (Betula sp.) hickory stands of isolated softwoodor (Carya spp.), beech (Fagus evergreen treeswere present, grandifolia)and yellow poplar although it was predominantlya (Liriodendron tulipifera). hardwoodforest. Oaktrees Dominantherbaceous vegetation (Quercus spp.) were the most consisted of Japaneseknotweed abundant species and grew to (Polygonum cuspidatum), garlic enormoussize. Other tree mustard(Alliaria officinalis), species of this diverse woodland wild grape(Vitis sp.), beggar-tick Caryaspp. ), were hickory ( (Bidens sp.), touch-me-nots yellow poplar(Liriodendron (Impatiens sp.), andgoldenrods tulipifera), (Jug/ans spp. ), walnut (Solidago sp.). Within the ash (Fraxinus spp.) and elm riparianzone, silver maple (Acer (Ulmus spp.). Evergreen species saccarinum ), black willow (Salix such as the white pine (Pinus nigra), and box elder (Acer strobus), easternhemlock (Tsuga negundo) were dominant. canadensis), pitch pine (Pinus Wetland ecosystems along the rigida), easternred cedar river were dominated by (Juniperus virginiana), and short dogwood species (Cornus sp. ), leaf pine (Pinus echinata) were ninebark (Physocarpus also located within the forest. opulifolious),cattails (Typha sp.), burreed(Sparganium sp.), panic By 1952 less than fivepercent of grass (Panicum sp.), needle rush thisoriginal forestremained (Eleocharis acicularis), andsoft (Bissell, 1952). Many species rush (Juncus effusus). were timbered for charcoal­ making, ship-building, timbering, mining, and rail-building. More 63 B. Wildlife ( Odocoileus virginianus ). According to the Pennsylvania 1. Terrestrial Game Commission (PGC), the As the borders of the Great populations of beaver (Castor Forest shrankand the number of canadensis) andgreat blue heron hunters andtrappers increased (Ardea herodias) areon the rise andthe industrial age began to in 1998 (PGC, 1997; J. Lucas, talce hold, the wildlife PGC, personal communication, populations of the region December, 1997). suffered. Wild cats (Fe/is spp.), wolves (Canis spp.), black bear Avian species in the study ( Ursus americanus ), Easternelk corridor,such as the red-tailed (Cervus canadensis), white-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), the deer (Odocoileus virginianus), Easternwild turkey (Meleagris andother large mammals, which gallopavo), the ring-necked were quite abundant in the 1750s, pheasant(Phasianus co/chicus), were virtually eliminated from the ruffedgrouse (Bonasa the Monongahela Valley (Bissell, umbel/us), andother gamebirds 1952). andsongbirds inhabit the wooded slopes of theriver valley. Several Around the early 19th century, duck species also use the hunting andtrapping laws were MonongahelaRiver for nesting instituted to minimize the loss of andmigration. In addition, the wildlifepopulations. Many Audubon Society indicated that conservation efforts were in 1997 over 200 bird species undertalcenby hunters, trappers, occurredin or nearthe study andother sportsmen to corridor. According to the reintroduce andstabilize Breeding Bird Atlas from 1983 populations. White-tailed deer to 1989 preparedby the PGC, the were reintroducedinto the area MonongahelaRiver was also and have since become a used by several migratorybird managementproblem. Habitat species. improvement projects were 2. Aquatic undertalcento attract the black bear back to the region. Additional discussions on biological indicators and Forested areasalong the river assessments of fishand now support wildlifethat is macroinvertebrate species are tolerantof human actions, presented in the Water Resources including squirrels(Sciurus section of this report. spp.), raccoons (Procyonlotor), opossums (Didelphis virginiana ), During the industrial era, the Easterncottontails (Sylvilagus aquatic community withinthe jloridanus), and white-tailed deer MonongahelaRiver was severely

64 reduced and nearlyeliminated. veligers or larvaeinto the In 1957, a fishpopulation study remainingportions of the river conducted by ORSANCO (P ADEP, 1997b ). Problems collected only 2 specimens from result when zebra mussels block the Monongahela River (Miko & pipe intakes at public water Lorson, 1994). The loss of the systems or power plants,as well entire mussel community as when the filter-feeding occurred nearlya century ago mussels reduce nutrient levels in (Ortmann, 1909). Since the water bodies andnative species 1960's, more stringent federal that rely on these nutrientscan andstate regulations on industry not sustain themselves. and increased community involvement contributed to a Another nuisancemussel that has significantimprovement in water been introduced into the quality and as a result, fish Monongahela River is the Asiatic populations roseto sustainable, clam(Corbicu/afluminea). This naturally reproducing levels. The species occurs in largenumbers recolonization ofunionid throughout the river andhas the mussels followedthe significant potential to create the same recovery of the fish and problems as the zebra mussel. It macroinvertebrate community is a small freshwaterbivalve (Anderson, 1997). mollusk that is comprised of two yellowish-gold thick,hinged One recent introduction into the shells, characterizedby a series MonongahelaRiver is the zebra ofconcentric ridges. This mussel (Dreissena po/ymorpha). species rarelygrows larger than a The zebra mussel is a dime-sized, nickel. black andwhite striped mussel that entered Pennsylvania in the It was introduced into the west ballast of a ship en route from coast around 1924 andwas Europe to LakeErie (PADEP, discovered along the east coast in 1997b). The mussels initially the 1970s. Asiatic clams can invaded the Great Lakes,the reach densities of 10,000 to Hudson River in New York, and 20,000 per squaremeter, the Mississippi Delta in potentially releasing several Louisiana,and eventually were million juvenilesdaily into the introduced throughout the samearea. Once released, the Allegheny andthe Ohio Rivers. juveniles are weak-swimmers usually foundnear the bottom of In 1997, zebra mussels were the water column. This is one of identifiedin Lock andDam No. the reasons they can cause water 3 in Elizabeth. Although there intakepipe problems, because the were only 14 mussels collected at intakepipes are generally places this lock, the potential exists for at the bottom of the water migrationby the free-swimming column also. 65 Some suggested methods of with the potential for occasional controlof this species include deposits of gravel or rubble. using screens, traps or small This zone is oftenassociated concentrations of chlorine or with spawning by freshwater bromine to kill the juveniles. drum (Aplodinotus grunniens), emerald shiner (Notropis Another interesting mussel atherinoides) andgizzard shad located in the Monongahela (Dorosoma cepedianum). River is Toxolasma parva. This species was collected near r.m. 5 The shoreline debris zone, also in July, 1996 by NAWQA forthe referredto as shallow water first time ever (Anderson, 1997). habitat, is located from the This identification supports the shoreline inwardto the river up factthat the river ecosystem is to 150 feetand is usually improving since the majority of associated with water depths freshwater mussels are intolerant fromO to 5 feet. Within this of pollution. zone, organicdebris androoted aquatic vegetation can The ACOE (1991) sectioned the occasionally be present. aquatic habitat within the Although, thesubstrate generally Monongahela River into 5 zones rangesfrom a hardrocky bottom related to substrate type, to coarsegravel and sandto a overlying water column, and fish silty substrate. This zone is spawning success. This resulted extremely significant in in the followingsegments: the successful fishreproduction main channel,the main channel when a suitable substrateis border, the shoreline-debris zone, available. the tailwater zone, andthe creek mouths andflooded channel The tailwater zone, another zone. The main channel, which significanthabitat for fish included areas within the spawning, occurs below each designated navigational channel lock anddam andis created by and areascontaining a water the turbulence andcurrents depth greater than9 feet, associated with the locks. This consisted primarily of a sandy provides for a clean substrateand substrate. Although, silt, gravel, oxygen rich water which attracts rubble, andbedrock were walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) present. These areaswere and sauger (Stizostedion determinedto be of little value in canadense), in particularly. The regardsto fishspawning. The finalsegment, the creek mouths main channel border was andflooded channel zone, can designatedas a transitionalarea become critical to nesting species between themain channeland such as thesmallmouth bass the shoreline-debris zones (Micropterus dolomieui) and containing a sandor silt substrate sunfishes(Lepomis sp. ). It was 66 determined by ACOE (1991) that are fish species, and 2 are this habitat is lacking in Pools 2 geological formations. and 3. No response fromthe PGC has C. PNDI Species been received at this time. Threatened or endangered species arean ever-increasing D. ImportantHabitats topic of discussion in the 1990's. The Pennsylvania Natural 1. RiparianForest Buffers Diversity Inventory (PNDI) is a A riparianforest buffer is defined compilation of all the threatened, as an areaof trees, usually endangered, or species of special accompanied by a scrub/shrub concernwithin Pennsylvania. component andother vegetation, This list is gathered fromthe that is adjacent to a body of water three agencies responsible for the (Siesholtz, 1997). This buffer managementof these species: maintains the integrity of stream Departmentof Natural Resources channelsand shorelines; reduces (DCNR), PFBC, and PGC. the impact of uplandsources of DCNR holds jurisdiction over the pollution by trapping, filtering, endangeredplants of the state, andconverting sediments, while PFBC is responsible for nutrients,and other chemicals; fish,reptiles, amphibians and andsupplies food,cover, and aquatic organisms andPGC is thermalprotection to fishand accountable forthe birds and other wildlife(Siesholtz, 1997). mammalsof the state. Riparianforest buffers are extremely beneficialin river According to the PFBC, there are conservation. Riparianbuffers 28 candidatespecies and one once protected most rivers and endangeredspecies located streamsin North America, but within the corridor (Appendix F). due to deforestationand Kirtland's snake, the only development, most of these endangered species on the list, is buffersare gone. The removal of also the only reptile listed. Of riparianbuffers results inadverse the 28 candidatespecies, there effectson water quality, wildlife are three macroinvertebrates, six andaquatic habitat, streambank fish, and 19 mussel species. stabilization, andaesthetics of the waterway. Over 32 percent DCNR indicated that 54 species of the corridor is classifiedas of special concernwere located open space andnearly 28 percent in the vicinity of the of this space is forested. Monongahela River (Appendix F). Of these 54 species, 29 are plant species, 16 are mussel species, 3 areinsect species, 4

67 2. Natural Heritage Inventory Black Dog Hollow Slopes, Areas Blainsburg Floodplain, and WesternPennsylvania CaliforniaOverlook (WPC, Conservancy (WPC), in 1994b) (Figure 4). cooperation with interested counties, is responsible for Black Dog Hollow Slopes is conducting county-wide Natural located along Ten Mile Creek, Heritage Inventories. These Washington County. The steep reports arecompilations of slopes contain a Dry Mesic unique or significant habitats, CalcareousCentral Forest geological finds,or biological Community dominated by sugar diversity areas. According to the maple (Acer saccharum), white Allegheny County Natural oak(Quercus alba), chinkapin Heritage Inventory, biological oak(Quercus muehlenbergii), diversity areas include "natural and beech (Fagus grandifolia). or human-influencedhabitats that This area is recognized as a High harborone or more occurrences Diversity Area andcontains of plantsor animals recognized impressive cliffsand outcrops as state or national species of made froma conglomeration of concern,or possess a high sandstone, siltstone, and diversity of species of plantsor limestone layers. animalsnative to the county, or support a rareor exemplary The BlainsburgFloodplain is natural community, including the located along the Monongahela highest quality and least Riverin Blainsburg, Washington disturbed examplesof relatively County. This areais a recovering common community types." forestedfloodplain community (WPC, 1994a). containing several small inland pools. The herbaceous There areonly two counties vegetation consists of sedges located within the corridor that ( Carex spp. ), softrush (Juncus participatedin the Natural effusus), wool grass (Scirpus Heritage Inventory program; cyperinus), swampmilkweed Allegheny and Washington. (Asclepias incarnata), blue Westmorelandand Fayette vervain (Verbena hastata) and Counties have begun the process various other species. to complete an Inventory, while Scrub/shrub sections of the Greene County has no plans to floodplainare composed of conduct a study (L. Smith, WPC, young black willow (Salix personal communication, nigra), cottonwood (Populus December, 1997). Within the deltoides), and easternsycamore counties that participated in this (Platanus occidentalis). Native program, three natural heritage butterflyand dragonfly inventory areasare located: populations also thrive in the area.

68 CaliforniaOverlook, the third natural heritage inventory is situated just north of Coal Center, on a steep sloped bankof the Monongahela River. This areawas documented as an outstandinggeological site.

3. State Game Lands State gamelands (SGL) are managedprimarily for outdoor recreation in the formof sport hunting. Protecting and perpetuating non-game wildlife species is increasingly becoming a management issue. Hiking, bird watching, andnature study are also popularpursuits at the SGL (PGC, 1989).

SGL 238 is the only SGL located within the corridor. It is located in German Township, Fayette County andcontains 662 hilly, partiallywooded acres. This SGL is managedprimarily for hunting small gameand maintaining several grassland areas (PGC, 1975).

69 VII. CULTURAL With the advent of the steamboat RESOURCES inthe 18 lOs, hundreds of showboats, river cruises, and A. Recreation celebrations were held on the river (Baldwin, 1938). Riverfront From the time when the properties were plentiful and European frontiersmen began to boathouses and small retreats settle into the Monongahela were beginningto appear. Valley in the mid 1700s, During the 1850s and 1860s, recreation along the river commerce and industrygrew at presented an interesting and unbelievable rates and from then controversial story. Although the on the Monongahela was Monongahela River was primarily recognized as a "commercial" used for commercial trade and river. Thepublic attitude toward transport, as early as the 1760' s, the river and recreation began a it was also used forrecreation. decline and the use of the river Hugh Henry Brackenridge, one for recreation would be a of the firstpoliticians in controversial topic of discussion Allegheny County, used the up to the 1990s. following statement in the 1780s to portray the Pittsburgh waterfront: Despite the enormous growth of commercial and industrial wharfs, You will see on a spring evening manufacturing facilities, and thebanks of the rivers lined with barge trafficon the river, men fishingat intervals, fromone recreation on the Monongahela another. Titis, with the streams has managed to sustain. Rowing gentlygliding, the woods, at a was a popular past time in the distance green, andthe shadows lengthening towardsthe town, 1870s and boat races attracted forms a delightful scene ... thousands of spectators (Muller, (Muller, 1989). 1989). Swimming and fishing

As populations in the valley increased and towns cropped up along the river, it became a social meeting place. Social walks, community events, and other related activities were held at the river banks, which were also the center of commercial trade, warehousing, and tavern development.

70 were also recreational favorites managed to reemerge and until the industrial and cooperation between the commercial uses of the river industrial andthe recreational began to take their toll. Water players on the river took on a quality decreased, riverfront new attitude. In fact,the properties were quickly occupied Pennsylvania Scenic Rivers Act by manufacturingfacilities, of 1972, listed the Monongahela wildlife populations declined, River fromPoint Marion,PA to and the scenic appearanceof the Pittsburgh, PA as a proposed river was forever altered. This Recreational River. This trend continued until the 1960s, classificationwas adjusted in when water quality improved, 1982 to a proposed Modified manufacturingdecreased and Recreational River. This people becameconcerned with designation described the ability the environmental condition of of the river to provide and the river. maintain recreational uses while balancingresidential, commercial Although one hundred yearsof and industrialuses. The criteria commercial andindustrial stated that this classification of activity greatlyimpacted the river may contain calm water that river, there has been anattempt can be, or is being, restored to by federal,state andlocal support appropriate water-based governmentsand conservation recreation, aquatic andfish life. organizations to revive the river and reclaim the river banks. 1. Use With the slow improvement in Many of the recreational uses of water quality, fishpopulations the past were still prevalent in have increased andrecreation has andalong the river in the 1990s. begun to reappear on the river. Fishing, boating, hiking, biking, In 1979, there were 137,800 river cruises, andswimming all boating activity days (a occurredon or near the designationby the ACOE Monongahela in 1998. indicating one person's participation in one recreation Fishing is one of the more activity at anytime during the popular pastimes within the calendar day without regard to corridor. According to the PFBC how manytimes that person (1997), the Monongahela River participates)on the Monongahela contains species such as walleye, River. Swimming increased 60 sauger, largemouthand percent between 1975 and 1979 smallmouth bass, and and water-skiing and fishing muskellunge. The ACOE nearlydoubled (SIHC,1995). concluded that fishingon the MonongahelaRiver forwalleye In the latter decades of the is good; populations of twentieth century, recreation 71 smallmouth bass, muskellunge, is projected that by the year and panfish are fair; largemouth 2000, there will be over 23,000 bass, yellow perch, and crappie (PFBC, 1998b). are occasional species and trout and northernpike are rare Hiking, biking, andwalking for (ACOE, 1997). pleasure and fitnessexperienced anenormous increase in the last Hunting, while not directly decade. In the mid 1990s, over related to the river, is also a one quarterof the region's popularactivity within the study population jogged, one half corridor. Most of the hunting walked, and one out of five focuses on State GameLands people engaged in day hikes. 238, located in German Township, Fayette County. A 2. Facilities listing of sportsmen clubs and According to fieldand fishing associations located background review studies within the corridor is located in conducted by Mackin, there are Appendix G. 122 recreational facilities located along the Monongahela River. Motor boating is an increasingly The breakdownby river pool is popular formof outdoor shown in Table 18. recreation on the Monongahela River. The number of boats Existing recreational facilitiesare registered in the entire state has located on Figure 6 anda listing grown 32 percent in the last of the facilitiesand their decade andcontributes more than amenities is located in Appendix $1. 7 billion each year to the G. Commonwealth's economy (PFBC, 1997). a) Public Parks Fifty-five public parksare Personal watercraft(PWC) are located within the corridor the fastest growing segmentof (Figure 6). Of these 55 parks,9 recreational boating. PWC are provided river access. Some of definedby PFBC (1998b) as the more notable facilitiesalong small, powerfuland highly the Monongahela include Mon maneuverable motorboats and View Park,Friendship Hill, Ten which are better knownby such Mile Community Park, brandnames as Jet Ski®, Sunnyside/Gallatin Park, SeaDoo®, Bomber® or Wave Monongahela Aquatorium, Runner®. In 1997, PWC McKee's Point Park,and Frick comprised approximately 6 Park. percent of the total boater registration in the state with 21,466 registered in the state. It

72 Table 18 Existing Recreational Facilities by Pool

Pool 6 Pool 5 Pool4 Pool 3 Pool 2 Pool I Public Parks 2 10 11 19 9 4 Marinas 2 10 8 11 5 0 Ramps 2 4 6 7 2 1 Ferries 0 1 0 0 0 0 Trails 1 1 0 0 2 0 Amusement 0 0 0 0 0 2 Parks Golf Courses 0 0 0 2 0 0 TOTAL 7 26 25 39 18 7

Mon View Parkis located in the access, playground equipment southernend of the corridor in andathletic fields. Greensboro. It is a borough park containing a skating rink, Sunnyside/GallatinPark was swimming pool, playground originated by the 1984 Twin equipment, athletic fields, anda RiversCouncil Riverfront walking trail. Recreation Plan. The parkwas completed in the early 1990s and Friendship Hill, a National contains river access, athletic Historic Site, is also located fields, andplayground within this section of the equipment. This parkalso corridor. The parkconsists of the contains anold Indianburial site estate of Albert Gallatin, a Swiss which was disturbed during the immigrantwho is best construction of the parkand was remembered forhis 13 year replaced with aninterpretive tenure as U.S. Secretaryof gravestone on it. Treasury under Thomas Jefferson and JamesMadison. Friendship The MonongahelaAquatorium, Hill details Gallatin's located in Monongahela, is a accomplishments and unique featureon the river, contributionsto late 18th and consisting of a concrete set of early 19th century U.S. history. bleachers, a large docking area It contains a visitor center, anda floatingstage. The exhibits, ten miles of naturetrails Aquatorium is used by the andguided tours of the site. Pittsburgh Wind Symphony and other performancegroups for Tenmile Community Park is summerevents. located along Tenmile Creek in Washington County. It is a joint municipal andcounty park consisting of picnic areas, river

73 McKee's Point Park is a There are also four parks multipurpose recreational and proposed fordevelopment within entertainment complex under the study corridor. Brownsville's development at the confluence of wharf project includes the the Youghioghenyand creation of a walking area with Monongahela Rivers in interpretive signs, boat docks for McKeesport. While portions of tour boats, and a boat ramp. thisproject are completed, there Theyhave alreadystarted to are numerous proposals forother receive fundingand anticipatethis amenities. The intent of this project will be successfully project is to have landing sites, a completed. marina, restaurants, specialty shops, offices,lodging, boat sales Charleroi's Monongahela River and storage, and a riverwalk all Front Promenade and Tower within the same complex. The proposal (1997) recommends the proposed Steel Heritage Trail and creation of a boardwalk for the Youghiogheny River Trail are residents and visitors to enjoy also planned to intersect within walking, fishing, or viewing the the park. river and surrounding areas. At the northern end of the FrickPark was created in 1919 promenade, an observation tower by Henry Frick. It encompasses is proposed to be constructed for 476 acres within Pittsburgh's city viewing Lock No. 4. limitsand contains the largest nature center of the Pittsburgh The City of Donora is proposing city parks. It also includes a a small municipal park. This park nature reserve, several athletic is to include a fishingarea withan fields,tennis courts, a bowling access ramp. green and numerous play areas.

74 The City ofMcKeesport and Park. The Two Rivers Marina is Versailles Borough applied for located in Dilliner, Greene fundingfrom DCNR in 1997 to County. It includes boat sales, develop a Master Site Plan fora campingand RV areas,a Y oughiogheny Linear Park, restaurant, storage, swimming, extending along the entertainment, and fishing. Y oughioghenyRiver from McKee's Point Parkto an The Denbo Marina is located in approximately 16 acre riverfront Washington County and contains parcellocated in Versailles 75 docks, private boat ramps,a Borough. The intent ofthis plan restaurant, groceries,and fuel was to connect public lands and supplies. A permitwas located along theriver, unite grantedby the ACOE in late public entities existing along the 1997 and is currentlybeing used river, discourage fragmented and to upgradethe Denbo facilities inappropriate development and by the addition ofseveral more usage, andrehabilitate docks. abandonedindustrial areas to a natural condition. The plan The Green Cove Yacht Club is included recommendations for located along Tenmile Creek, the placement ofballfields, forest Fayette County. This marina has buffers,a kayakclub, a trail, 250 boat docks, camping andRV lighting, andparking facilities areas,a restaurant,athletic fields, along the riverfront. At the time playground equipment,and fuel oftlns study, the City was and supplies. The largestmarina creating a steering committee to on the Monongahela River is the oversee the project. Beach Club Marinalocated in New Eagle. It consists of300 b) Marinas boat docks, a floating There are36 existing private convenience store, boat and marinas located within the study watercraftrentals, and a service corridor(Figure 6). The majority department. of the marinasalso include activities or amenitiessuch as Four new marinaswere proposed camping, playground equipment, within thestudy corridor. One picnic areas,restaurants, fueling proposed marina in Forward capabilities and supplies. Townshipreceived anACOE permit in September of 1997 and Several marinas worth noting due is expected to be constructednear to their size and amenities are the East Monongahela. A second Two Rivers Marina,the Denbo planproposed the constructionof Marina, the Green Cove Yacht a new marinain Fredericktown, Club, the Beach Club Marina, which is expected to include and the marinaat McKee's Point 1,960 feetof docking space.

75 The third proposed marina is There are3 proposalsrelated to intended for Brownsville, Fayette ramp access located withinthe County. This facility is expected study corridor. One proposal to include an exclusive 25 dock was preparedby Luzerne marina containing a restaurant Township to expand an existed and other related amenities. PFBC ramp to include 10 Kennywood Park has also permanent boat docks. The expressed interestin a possible intentof this project is to increase marinawith a restaurant to be the river access for fishing, located just east of their existing boating, and handicapped Sandcastle Park. While this type individuals. of facility could be used inthe area, Kennywood Park is Kennywood Park, the owners and searching for an operator to run operators of Sandcastle, the facility. proposed a public boat ramp adjacent to Sandcastle. This ramp would be open to the public and was expected to include boat c) , Boat Ramps trailerparking facilities. Also Twenty-two public boat ramps proposed within the study are located within the corridor corridor is a PFBC ramp in (Figure 6). Seven of these are Monessen. PFBCramps, whilethe remaining 15 are municipal. There are d) Ferries numerous privately-owned docks Anotherform of river access along the Monongahela Riverbut located along the Monongahela these are not individuallylocated were the old ferrycrossings. forthis project. Ferries were historically used to compensate for thelack of bridges across the river. Only one operational ferryis located in the study corridor. It is located at r.m. 64 and crosses from Fredericktown in Washington County to East Fredericktown in Fayette County. This ferryis the last cable-driven ferryin the easternUnited States. The cost is 15 cents for passengers and 75 cents for cars.

76 During the course of this study, a County Pennsylvania (Smith, total of 19 abandoned ferry 1996), there were 12 ferries locations were located within the crossing the river connecting study corridor (Figure 6). Greene and Fayette County in According to History of Greene 1876. Three other abandoned ferrycrossings were located during data collection in Brownsville, Coal Center, and Fayette City.

Table 19 shows the locations of all the abandoned ferrieslocated along the Monongahela River. fudicationsof fourother ferry crossings were noted in Dutch Hill, Belle Vernon,Monessen, and Monongahela but could not be verifiedor located.

Table 19 Abandoned Ferry Locations

Name Location Dilliner Uooer Ferry Near the mouth of theCheat River DillinerFerry Dunkard Creek Greensboro Ferrv Greensboro A.J. Neil Ferry Near Greensboro Grays Ferrv Monongahela Township Ross Ferrv At the mouth of Big Whitely Creek Hatfields Ferry Monongahela River McCanns Ferrv Near the mouth of Little Whitely Creek Browns Ferry Cumberland Township Flennikens Ferry Near themouth of Muddy Creek Davidsons Ferry Near Rice's Landing Hughes Ferry Rice's Landing Maxwell Ferry Dutch Hill Brownsville Ferry Brownsville Simoson Ferry Coal Center Fayette Citv Ferry Fayette Citv BelleVernon Ferry BelleVernon Monessen Ferry Monessen Parkinsons Ferry Monongahela 77 e) Trails and was the main routefrom According to the Department of New England to the Carolinas. It City Planning, Pittsburgh andits was said to make warriorsout of surroundingcommunities were young men of each tribe (Greene fastbecoming a national hub in a County Conservation District, growing greenway system 1997). (Pittsburgh Departmentof City Planning, 1997). Greenways and The Y oughiogheny River Trail is trails have the potential to link a multi use recreational trail, parksand natural areasby non­ which allows hikers, bikers, motorized access routes. They cross-country skiers, fishermen were intended to link andhorseback riders. During communities, theme parks, 1996 the YRT drew just over municipal parks, industrial parks, 200,000 people, and in 1997 natural features,shopping more than300,000 users are districts,historical landmarks and expected (Regional Trail to showcase cultural and Corporation [RTC], personal industrial heritage, reclaim the communication, August, 1997). environment, provide river In 1997, 28 miles of trail were access, preserve natural completed between Connellsville resources, promote business and andBoston, withthe remaining tourism, invite people into 15 miles expected to be complete communities, andrekindle social by the fallof 1998. interaction. There were 4 existing trails located within the The Montour Trail is proposed to study corridor (Figure 6). extend fromClairton to Route 51 in Coraopolis. When completed, The 68 mileWarrior Trail, which it will extend 55 miles and was used for 5,000 years by circumvent Pittsburgh's southern Native American Indians, was re­ border. It is located along the established as aninterpretive formerMontour railroad which hiking trail. Biking, horseback runs adjacent to Montour Run in riding andother activities are Findlay,Moon, North Fayette restricted on the Warrior Trail, andRobinson Townships in whichruns fromGreensboro to Allegheny County andalso in Flint, Ohio (Carnein,1988). Peters andCecil Townships in Washington County. There are The Catawba Trail is another trailheads located at Enlow, interpretive trail that begins in Groveton, andMontour Run. Rice's Landingand ends in Twenty miles of this trailare Maryland. Its history began as a completed (DCNR, 1998; RTC, portion of the Cherokee Trail, 1997). While the majority of this which spannedthe easternUnited trailproject was outside the States fromFlorida to Canada corridor, when completed it will provide added access to Clairton. 78 and manufacturingpast, the trail There are6 proposed trails would remind visitors of the projects located within the major role local communities corridor (Figure 6). Greene played in developing the U.S. County has one proposed trail andthe world during the located withinthe county. The industrial era (SIHC, 1996). Greensboro Riverwalk will develop a walkway along the The proposed Nine Mile Trail is river, startingat the borough currentlyunder investigation. It lockhouse and ending at Mon was expected to extend fromthe View Park. This trail is intended mouth of Nine Mile Runto Frick to connect the Greensboro Park. historic district with the park, which receives 1,500 visitors a The Three RiversHeritage Trail weekend (Hrin, 1998). It is to will begin at Washington's extend a total of 3. 7 miles and tie Landingin Pittsburgh along the in with a proposed riverfront Allegheny River, travelssouth recreation areaand a proposed along the Allegheny to the Ohio river museum at the borough River,then crosses the Ohio and lockhouse. proceeds up the Monongahela River past Station Squareand In Fayette County, the Sheepskin SouthsideRiverfront Park to the Trail is proposed as a multi-use Glenwood Bridge. This trail is recreational trail. It would slated to be the starting point of a extend 32 miles fromPoint network of trails connecting Marion to Dunbar,connecting to Pittsburgh to Washington, DC. It the Youghiogheny River Trail. allowed only hikers andbikers There is also a proposal fora on the trail. Three sections of the bike trail to be located along side trail arecompleted, totaling 4.4 of the National Road. miles. The total length of this trail will be 10-12 miles when Three trails were proposed within completed (DCNR, 1998; RTC, Allegheny County. The 1997). proposed Steel Heritage Trail will extend 15 miles fromthe f) GolfCourses Glenwood Bridge to Clairton. It There aretwo golf courses will connect the Youghiogheny located within the corridor: the River Trail, the Three Rivers Riverview Golf Course andthe Heritage Trail, and the Montour Monongahela Country Club Trail. The intent of the Steel (Figure 6). The Riverview Golf Heritage Trail is to display the Course is a public facilitylocated story of the formerheavily in Bunola, Allegheny County. It industrializedSteel Valley. By consists of an18 hole golf passing landmarksthat reflectthe course, a restaurantand a pro valley's diverse ethnic origins 79 shop. The Monongahela Country visitors during that time. This Club is a private 9 hole golf facilityalso holds the monthly course situated in Monongahela, RiverplexMiller Lite Concert Washington County. Series anda weekly volleyball league. g) Amusement Parks Two amusementparks are B. Archaeological and Historical located within the study corridor: The history of the Monongahela Kennywood Park and Sandcastle Valley covered numerous events Park. Both of these parksare andpeople. A complete timeline located in Pool 1, Allegheny depicting the main events from County (Figure 6). each era canbe foundin Appendix H andFigure 7 Kennywood Park,a national illustrates the location of registered historic site, is located significanthistoric sites within in West Mifflinand is the study corridor (Appendix I). celebrating its 100thbirthday in 1998. The parkcontains 1. Prehistory numerous amusementpark rides, Archaeologists have traced refreshmentsand games. It humansettlement in the receives 1.3 million visitors Monongahela Valley back during its 125 day season. It has approximately 10,000 years. The been estimated that 80% of Mound Builders, earlydwellers theses visitors arewithin a 90 who constructedtheir settlements mile radius of park. out of a series of mounds, occupied manyareas of western Sandcastle,owned andoperated Pennsylvania, including several by Kennywood Park,is a water sites along the Monongahela parknear the Glenwood Bridge River (MonongahelaCulture, containing water slides, a wave 1998). Manyof these mounds pool, swimming pools, remain andhave been approximately 55 slips at the documented by the Pennsylvania dock, anda restaurant/bar. It is Historical and Museum open for90 days of the year and Commission (PHMC). receives 250-350 thousand As much as one thousandyears

Table 20 Historical Eras of the Monongahela Valley

- - - - - 1>1500 1600 1650 1750 1770 1810 1820 1850 1860 1950 1960 1990 Early European Early Commercial Industrial Post Prehistory Settlers Manufacturing Development Revolution Industrial

80 ago, the river valley was the these tribes continued until the domain of Native American defeat of the Indiansin the Indians. The Monongahela Pontiac War of 1763 (Historyof Indians, who lived in the basin Allegheny County,Pennsylvania between 900 and1600 AD, 01ol. 1 ), 1889). disappeared inexplicably before white settlers entered the area. The areaimmediately along the The "Monongahela people" as MonongahelaRiver was used they arereferred to by primarilyas a hunting areaby the archaeologistsare known to have local Indiantribes. While there lived in stockaded villages are some records of Indian located on hilltops. encampmentsalong the river, such as Seneca Queen The area surrounding the Aliquippa's settlement at the MonongahelaRiver was mouth of the Youghiogheny occupied at the time of European River, nearlyall of the major arrival by various tribes of the Indianvillages in the region were Iroquois Nation, also known as located along either the the Iroquois Confederacy. The Allegheny or Ohio Rivers. original Indian nations included in the Iroquois Confederacy were Villages established by Native the Oneidas, Onondogas, American Indianswere referred Mohawks, Cayugas, and to as "old forts". These were Senecas. Later, the Tuscaroras usually located on high,rich soils were admitted as well (Historyof with a particularpattern and AlleghenyCounty, Pennsylvania building style 01eech, 1971). 01ol. 1 ), 1889). Manywere later takenover by whitesettlers as convenient In westernPennsylvania, the locations to settle or to set-up Iroquois Nation was closely trading posts. Brownsville, associated with the Shawnee and which was formerlycalled DelawareIndian tribes which "Redstone Old Fort" andBelle inhabited the areaas well. This Vernon,built nearan old fortat association was made through the mouthof Speers Run, aretwo both geographicfamiliarity and examplesof this01eech, 1971). because the Iroquois exercised a historic claim to having Indiantrails were the earliest conquered the Delawares. travel routes in the Monongahela Because the Shawnees were Valley, andwere adopted by a related to the Delawares by succession of people over the languageand customs, andwere years. They were used by white relatively fewin number in traders, particularlyFrench­ westernPennsylvania, they also Canadian furtrappers, who were treated as inferiorsby the tradedwith Native American Iroquois. The association of Indiansas earlyas the late 1600s 81 (Monongahela Culture, 1998). trail crossed the Monongahela They were also used by River at Brownsville in its militiamenduring the French and southeast to northwest direction Indian War. Anecdotal evidence route. It earnedits name from indicates that some of the local Nemacolin, a well-known Indian trails that crossed the Delaware Indian, who was Mason-Dixon Line may have recruited by white traders to been efficient routes by which marka pathway in the early slaves were transported from 1750s. Nemacolin's trailwas south to north. Most recently, later improved and used by Indiantrails have been modified George Washington andGeneral forrecreational purposesas Edward Braddock formilitary hiking trails. purposesbecause it was an efficientroute through the area. One of the oldest trails, the Portions of the rebuilt trailwere Catawba or Cherokee Trail, renamedBraddock's Road, until spannedthe easternUnited States they became partof the National fromFlorida to Canada. It Road in the early 1800's. Most traversed westernPennsylvania, recently, the section of the anda portion of this historic National Road through the route, fromRices Landing south Brownsville areahas been through West Virginia, has been upgradedand renamedagain, preservedfor recreational hiking. thereby concludingits evolution Another Indianroute that fromNemacolin's Trail to the to predated European settlers was U.S. Route 40. the WarriorTrail, which was the main trail of the Iroquois nation 2. Early European Settlers and was used heavily in their 18th (1650s-1760s) century warsagainst southern The French were the first Indian tribes such as the Catawba Europeansto explore the region. (WesternPennsylvania Historical La Salle staked broad claims to Survey, 1938). The Warrior the entire Ohio River basin for Trail runs east-west about 5 the French in 1682, but the miles north of the Mason Dixon LancasterTreaty, struck between Line with its easternterminus on the British and the Iroquois the Monongahela River(Warrior Indiansin 17 44, disputed Trail Association, 1998). The France'sclaim of the land west of WarriorTrail Association of the Allegheny Mountains. The Greene County currently regional conflictscame to a crest maintains this route as a hiking in 1754 with the onset of the trail. French andIndian War.

Nemacolin's Trail was the most Manyfamous military men prominent path in the crossed the Monongahela River MonongahelaValley region. The 82 during this period, most notably catastrophic to the colonies of George Washington and General Pennsylvania and Virginia Edward Braddock. George because fearof attack spread Washington was sent into the through the frontiersettlers area with the Virginia Militia at (Western Pennsylvania age 21 to deliver a message from Genealogical Society, 1977). Governor Dinwiddie of Virginia to the French at Fort LeBoeuf The close of the French and (Palmer, 1984). He returneda IndianWar in 1763, the number of times on military AmericanRevolution in 1783, missions. General Braddock, and the victory of General "Mad" commanderof all British forces Anthony Wayne over British and in America, also crossed the river Indiantroops at the Battle of during his French and IndianWar Fallen Timbers in 1794, finally campaign. ended more than a half-century of fightingin western Braddock plannedto defeatthe Pennsylvania (Riley,1996). French along the frontierby inspiring colonists to join him 3. EarlyTrade and andresist French encroachment. Manufacturing(1770-1810) The most pivotal partof his Afterthe French andIndian War, strategy was capturing Fort the region beganto see aninflux Duquesne fromthe French, and of immigrantsfrom the east. then heading north to Niagara From 1790-1815, a shiftfrom (Western Pennsylvania subsistence agricultureto a Genealogical Society, 1977). market-based economy occurred. Braddock led his armytoward Although the Monongahela Fort Duquesne along the Valley was still sparsely Nemacolin Trail, which he populated in the 1 790s, it was improved in 1755 forthe purpose startingto lose its frontier of carryinginfantry and supply character. Immigration was on wagons ( fromthat point forward the rise and frontierlife was it took on the nameBraddock's slowly giving way to small Road). General Braddock's towns. The firstestates were militaryeffort was unsuccessful, cropping up at this time, most however, andhis armywas notably Friendship Hill, built by defeatedby the French and Albert Gallatin in 1788 on 640 Indiansafter a surpriseattack acres of landnear New Geneva. along the MonongahelaRiver at Gallatin, a Swiss immigrant, the current location of Braddock became a successfulbusinessman Borough. Braddock himself was and later animportant U.S. mortally wounded in the battle politician and diplomat. His and died during the trip back to elegant FriendshipHill estate Cumberland, Maryland. The was used as a resort by political effectof Braddock's defeatwas 83 leaders during Thomas best known stoneware factories Jefferson's presidency (Baldwin, west of the Allegheny Mountains 1939). (Schaltenbrand, 1996). Stoneware was also made in During the late 1700s, the Fredericktown, andNew Geneva. importanceof roads and trails was heightening. The Conestoga River transportwas the most wagon firstappeared in the east importantmeans of moving between 1750 and1760, and it products to Pittsburgh andother revolutionized road travel. As markets, andin 1782 the wheeled vehicles were employed Monongahela River was declared more extensively to carry people a navigable public highway by andfreight in the west, the the federal government (ACOE, population realized the problems 1991). Its role in trade increased they facedin road building. afterthe Commonwealth of Petitions were sent fromwestern Pennsylvania undertook the first Pennsylvaniato the legislature in improvements by removing rocks support of road construction, but and constructinglow, stone dams the areawas seen as too vast and in 1792. uninhabited to warrantsuch an expenditure. Boats were in demandbecause they were an essential partof As thepopulation increased, the moving settlers andgoods. Boats demand for necessities spurred at this time were mostly single­ the growthof cottage industries. trip vessels that were dismantled Mills, tanneries, anddistilleries at their destination point. The were high growth industries in exception to this were keelboats the late 1700s. Crops which which moved in both directions. could be used in distilling took a Keelboats were pushed upstream front row position inagriculture, by men setting poles into the and the mercantile trade mud andshoving theboat along. established hubs in Brownsville Pittsburgh, Belle Vernon, andPittsburgh. Allenport, andBrownsville became boat-building centers Glassmakingand ceramicswere specializing mainly in flatboats industries that grew rapidly from and keelboats. Other boats in 1800-1810. The stoneware production were pirogues, skiffs, pottery industry in the bateaux, arks, barges, andpacket Monongahela Valley was boats (Bissel, 1952). estimated at nearly fifty individual firms, at which 150 WhiskeyRebellion {1794) potters and skilled craftsmen The Whiskey Rebellion was a were employed (Schaltenbrand, social uprising over the issue of 1996). Greensboro eventually whiskey and taxation in the became home to the largest and United States. It was an event 84 that challenged the U.S. place in the international order: Constitution forthe first time, no other nation ever gave pitting rural pioneers against the mankind two kinds of whiskeys. Like our political institutions, urban political elite. The which would be inconceivable rebellion focused national without them, both express our attention on urban-rural conflicts national characteristics; both are and what were interpreted as distilled not only fromour native gross injustices imposed on the grains but fromour native vigor, people of the frontier through the suavity, generosity, peacefulness, taxingof one of their most and love of accord (Bissel, 1952). valued commodities, whiskey. Southwestern Pennsylvania SouthwesternPennsylvania had played a major role in the an advantage in distilling rebellion, particularlythe whiskey because quality rye was counties of Greene, easily grown here. It was Westmoreland,and Fayette. estimated that in the 1790s, twenty-five percent of all stills in Whiskey and furswere two of the United States were located in the most importantcommodities Pennsylvania. Although local during the Early Trade and farmers were not getting rich ManufacturingEra. Both could fromdistilling whiskey, its readily be traded or sold by presence in the marketeconomy merchantsand were easier and helped to leverage economic cheaper to transportacross the stability. Consequently, western mountains than bulky, heavy, or Pennsylvanianswere aggravated perishable items (Baldwin, by the tax placed on whiskey, 1939). Whiskey rose to a which they viewed as wrongful position as one of the most andoppressive. valuable market commodities at the time because of its ubiquitous Pennsylvania had at least use in society. nineteen laws or supplementing acts imposing taxeson liquor Aside from its economic value, fromthe time the colony was whiskey was the pride of frontier founded to 1791 (Baldwin, culture as the followingquote 1939), but before the end of the illustrates: American Revolution there seemed to have been no regular The Americans got no help from collection in the west. In heaven or the saints but they response to the enforced knewwhat to do with com. In the heroic age our forefathers collection of the excise tax on invented self-government, the whiskey, local meetings were Constitution, and bourbon, and on held by so-called "whiskey the way to them they invented rebels" in back rooms of homes, rye. And that shows our proper taverns, andinns to discuss their

85 opposition tactics. The foremostwas its location and grassroots insurgency peaked in wealth of natural resources. the summer of 1794 when Bituminous coal,in particular, farmers, distillers,and artisans was an importantresource in openly protested the excise tax commercial growth. The coal through armeddemonstrations industry expandedsteadily from and brutal attacks on tax 1760 when local blacksmiths, collectors, some of whom were mill operators and residents were tarred and feathered. a growingmarket, up to the 1860s when glass factories,iron The legacy of the Whiskey furnaces,salt works andwoolen Rebellion, which lasted only mills voraciously used coal for eight weeks, was significant to production (National Park American history. Trials of the Service, 1992). The arrested insurgents were held in Monongahela River was already 1795 with many being arraigned becoming a valuable resource for for treason, but most of the trials transportation andthe riverbanks ended in acquittals forlack of were soon lined with for evidence (Baldwin, 1939). wharves. These became Feeling the political pressure of crowded, active places the rebellion,President George surrounded by blocks of Washington issued a warehouses,inns,taverns, and proclamationpardoning all those assorted commercial businesses. who were not under indictment or sentence. Other factorsaided to the development of the region, 4. Commercial Development particularlyinnovations in (1810-1850s) transportation. Commercial Rampantcommercial development in Pittsburgh grew development in the Monongahela with the completion of the Valley was attributed to a Pennsylvania Main Line Canal, combination of factors. First and construction of the National

Table 21 Timeline of the Commercial Development Era

1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 COMMERICIALDEVELOPMENT ERA War of 1812 Era of Early Manufacturing Beginning of Heavy Coal Mining National Road Era First Dams Constructed on the Mon River Steamboat Era

86 Road, andthe invention of the Beforethe National Road was steamboat. Hundreds of introduced, commerce, land steamboats were traveling the value andsocialization were Monongahela River annuallyby limited. Afterthe road was the1830s (Muller, 1989). During completed and opened to the this period of commercial public in 1818, it flourishedas development, rail, road, and the premiere route of transport water routes opened trade as far carryingfreight, mail and west as St. Louis andas far south passenger travel from east to as New Orleans. Bridges, which west. As earlyas 1818, stage were necessary m. overcommg. lines ranthree times a week, inns weather-induced delays in freight and tavernsprospered, andcattle, andpassenger transport, were horses, hogs and sheep were erected over the Monongahela in regularlydriven to eastern the 1830s and 1840s (Day, marketsby way of the National 1996). A covered bridge at West Road (Day, 1996). Brownsville was considered one of the most picturesque sites on From 1818 to the 1850s, the the National Road until it was National Road was the lifelineof demolished in 1910 (Day, 1996). social andcommercial development, andthe main a) Transportation Innovations competitor to river traffic. The In1806 Congress passed into constructionof the National law, "[a]n Act to regulate the Road incorporatedmany unique laying out and making a Road bridges andhighway markers, from·Cumberland, in the State of some of which remain today. Maryland, to the State of Ohio" There arethree remaining toll (Day, 1996). It becamethe first houses along the length of the roadway to link the eastern National Road, as well as taverns United States with the west, and andmile markers. It remains one was duly named the National of the fewactive tracesof Road. Its 600 miles of roadway America's movement westward, went fromCumberland, and is conserved as the National Marylandto Vandalia, Illinois Road Heritage Parkin andwas heralded as the first Pennsylvania(Rhodeside & route to overcome the impassable Harwell, Inc., 1994). mountains andopen the west for settlement. While the National Road was the premiere surfaceroute of The National Road was a transportation, steamboats were significantproject in our nation's becoming the primarymode of history because it challenged the river transit. Steamboats were political, economic, and firstintroduced to westernrivers engineering limits of the time. with the sailing of the New Orleans in 1811. The New 87 Orleans made a safetrip from progressively andby the 1830s, it Pittsburgh to New Orleansin that was the undisputed leader in river year, demonstrating that steam trade. power could be used in river navigation. The second The earlydevelopment of the steamboatin history, TheComet, Monongahela Valley was was built in Brownsville in 1813. inhibited by the precarious nature A river town which continued to of navigation. Water levels and operate a successfulboat­ ice jams halted trade at times, a building industry for more than a condition which was century, Brownsville was the unacceptable to local merchants firstand most important center who facedincreasing demands for steamboat building on the for goods andintense Monongahela. competition with merchants along the Ohio andAllegheny From 1811 to 1816, nine Rivers. steamboats were built and although the technology To resolve this difficultyand improved,the cost and create dependable slackwater unfamiliarityof steamboats conditions, locks and damswere retarded general use until 181 7 firstintroduced to the when the Washington traveled MonongahelaRiver in the late fromNew Orleansto Louisville 1830s. Construction on Lock in 25 days (Reiser, 1951). With and Dam Nos. 1 & 2 beganin this much-publicized event, 1838 andthey opened in 1841 riverboat towns were officially under the Monongahela on the rise. They were not only Navigation Company, a state­ economic focalpoints in the held company organizedin 183 7. MonongahelaValley, they were Other locks anddams followed cultural hubs of the boat-building in the 1840s and 1850s which craftand home to craftsmen made the Monongahela more recognized fortheir skill as far competitive for river trade and away as New Orleans. Some of transport(ACOE, 1991). the most notable boat-building centers were Pittsburgh, Transportationimprovements Brownsville, Elizabeth, Belle introduced during the era of Vernon,McKeesport, West Commercial Development Elizabeth, Port Perry, continued to fuelthe population MonongahelaCity, Fayette City, explosion into the Monongahela and West Brownsville Shipyards Valley. Foreign immigrants on the Monongahelagrew to a were entering the areain large scale of production that exceeded numbers attractedby the both the Ohio andAllegheny available employment shipyards. The use of the opportunities in towns along the steamboat increased nver. The movement of people 88 migrating south and west brought quality, which benefited the a steady flow of transients MonongahelaValley by through the Monongahela Valley. generating close ties between Residents viewed the river and mining and other industries. its banks as inexhaustible Fayette andWestmoreland resources, claiming as much as Counties were the top two possible for municipal and producers of coal in western private consumption (Muller, Pennsylvaniagiving rise to 1989). company-owned coal towns and more immigration (National Park Anotherpositive contributor to Service, 1992). Unfortunately, the economic growthin the the smoky-burningcharacter of Monongahela Valley was war. It bituminous coal had serious was saidthat "fora time it effects on air quality in the appearedthat the primary MonongahelaValley. Pittsburgh circulation medium of exchange represented the extreme case of in Pittsburgh was to be army this, earningthe reputation of certificates... " (Reiser, 1951). "The Smoking City" which it The RevolutionaryWar had been retained fora century (National responsible for the growthspurt ParkService, 1992). of all branches of industryand the Warof 1812 had similar 5. Industrial Revolution(1860- economic impacts. Because 1950) much of the Warof 1812 was a Although the course of dispute over control of the Great America's second Industrial Lakes region, the northwest army Revolution began in the years was provisioned by Pittsburgh prior to theCivil War, it is merchants. Consequently, from doubtfulthat it would have 1810-1816 manufacturersin accelerated without the influence Pittsburghgrew to thepoint of of the waritself. The enormous over-expansion. A depression consumption of materials followedthe war, but it was dictated that existing plants run short-lived and manufacturing to their fullcapacity, andthat andcommerce picked up again in new ones be constructed. There the 1820s. was heavy investment in iron and steel, which were the dominant It was coal mining, however, that material used in war industries emerged as the most important andrailroading (Hacker, 1968). player in river trade. Inwestern Pennsylvania, the coal industry The process of making coke was expanded steadily from the 1760s one of the first technological to 1860s with the development of innovations of this era. manufacturing. The Pittsburgh Ironworkers preferredcharcoal seam of bituminouscoal proved for smelting in the 1840s and to be of exceptionally high 89 1850s, but it consumed an proclaimed a new "Age of Steel" enormous amount of wood which which would take over the became expensive as the local preceding "Age of Iron". His supplies dwindled. The search proclamation was premature, fornew fuel sources was a result however, because litigation and of the stiffcompetition from glitches in the Bessemer process European exporters, who were hampered the use of this method undercutting prices (National for almost a decade. American Park Service, 1992). By the iron manufacturersat the close of 1840s, it was recognized that the the Civil War had no alternative coal extracted in southwestern but to use the traditional method Pennsylvaniawas particularly of making wrought iron products, good forcoking andthus, as rather than Bessemer steel (Wall, early as the 1860s, the industry 1970). was in bloom. Beehive coke ovens, bankovens, block ovens, Afterthe obstacles blocking the and rectangular ovens peppered development of the Bessemer the landscapealong hills, valleys process were removed in 1866, andsteep riverbanks. the era of Big Steel began. Andrew Carnegie was amongthe When steel manufacturing firstentrepreneurs to concentrate entered the local scene, the on the manufacturingof steel, demandfor coke grew erecting his firstblast furnacein exponentially. In 1856, Henry 1870. By 1872 Carnegie,along Bessemer discovered a way to with his CarnegieGroup, make steel out of pig iron and plannedhis second blast furnace,

Table 22 Timeline of the Industrial Revolution

1850 18&> 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 19&> INDUS1RIALREVOLUTION QvilWar EarlyComtruction of Railroads RailroadBoomEra Periodof CokeManufacturing BigSteel Era F.clgarPlant Thormon QJened HonrsteadWorks Bes&m:r Plant QJened HonrsteadSteel Strike � BlastFurmce Plant QJened Q-ganizationofIB Steel Co. OairtonWorks QJened CarrieFwnaces 6 & 7QJened WWI. 1919 SteelStrike WWI.I 90 the Edgar Thomson Works, bond packages in Europe andthe whichwould become a major United States that changedthe producer of Bessemer steel on way largeinfrastructure projects the banks of the Monongahela in were approached. Braddock. The advent of Big Steel was Meanwhile, hiscompetitors were paramount to changes in the developing the Pittsburgh national landscape. It changed Bessemer Steel Company on railroad development, which in Homestead's riverfront(Muller, turnchanged the social, 1989). The new mill at economic andphysical Homestead turnedout its firstrail orientation of the Monongahela in August 1881 and immediately Valley by edging out the crowded Carnegie'sdomain National Road, fuelingindustrial (Wall, 1970). Other independent development, andsparking steel producers at the time anotherwave of immigration. As included the Jones and Laughlin coal and coke operations mills which occupied both banks flourishedin the Monongahela of the Monongahelain the City Valley, railroad lines expandedto of Pittsburgh. In addition to iron serve them with connector lines. furnaces,other integratedsteel The expansionof railway lines mills andspecialty works increased substantiallywith the captured miles of riverfront. The openingof the Pennsylvania river provided water for the Railroad in 1852. numerous industrial processes anda disposal system for It was the successfulcompletion industrial waste. It also of the Pennsylvania andB&O supported thedumping of slag, Railroads that had the most local sludge, anddebris on its banks. repercussions. Aside fromthe basic movement of goods and Regional development took on a resources, the expansion of whole new force with large-scale railroad lines followingthe Civil steel production. Locally­ War created job opportunities, produced steel was transformed which in turnattracted large into bridge beams, building numbers of southernblacks, and frames,and rails to be easternand southernEuropeans transported to locations around to the area. Railroadsalso made the country for new, it possible for outlying residents sophisticated structural designs to travel by train into the city, like the Golden Gate Bridge, and forthe more affluenturban Brooklyn Bridge, St. Louis dwellers to move into newly Bridge, andEmpire State developing neighborhoods. Building. These projects were not only structurally innovative, but Carnegiealso worked out 91 IndustrialBoomtowns percent of the 12,000 residents, The industrial age was the and resulted in death for22 impetus behind the founding of people. many towns in the Monongahela Valley. The introduction of large Social Umest corporationsand investors into In 1892 the Carnegie Steel the region was a definitive aspect Companywas the largest steel of the economic transitionfrom companyin the world (Wall, commerce to industry. Coal 1970). Carnegiehad acquired mines were bought by the rival Homestead plant,which corporations and their investors was a modem andefficient soon established headquartersin facility. However,with the large cities like Pittsburgh, purchase of the Homestead plant Philadelphia and New York came six highly-organizedlabor (National Park Service, 1992). lodges of the Amalgamated Association of Iron andSteel The landscape of the Workers, a powerfulunion of the MonongahelaValley gave way to most highly-skilled workers in industrialcenters which sprang the industry (Wall, 1970). up almost overnight. Boomtowns such as Charleroi, Steelworkers, who were upset by Monesson, Donora, and reductions in wages, unfavorable Glassport, were the instant labor agreements, andthreats to creations of bankers, their unions,wanted better union steelmasters, mining magnates contracts and were preparedto and railroad barons (Magda, take on the Carnegieempire. 1985). Charleroi developed so The famous Homestead Steel quickly that it earnedthe name Strike erupted in 1892 when "Magic City". River boomtowns steelworkers were refuseda followed similar patternsof rapid contractby Carnegiemanager urbanization. Henry Clay Frick. The result was a bitter andviolent clash Instantaneouseconomic success between the Carnegie Steel was not the only reputation that Company andworkers at the industrial boomtowns retained. Homestead mill. The cost of industrialization was severe pollution. The most Frick took drastic measures by notorious example of deadly commissioning Pinkerton Guards pollution along the Monongahela to enter Homestead andsuppress River was the "killer smog of the strike by armedforce. 1948" in Donora. In this case, Although the casualties were sulfurfrom burningcoal at the surprisingly low, the battle local·steel mill mixed with received world-wide attention. dampness in the air to produce This was partially due to the high sulfuric acid that affected43 drama of the incident in which 92 men, women andchildren hurried term demand forsteel production to the banksof the Monongahela at WW II levels, andthat the after dark with everything from region's economy would have to guns to household items to fight undergo intense change. It was offthe Pinkerton Guard, who had also a time to evaluate the degree floated in on a barge during the of degradation that the night. Frick himself was shot Monongahela River and its and stabbed, but recovered. The riverbanks had received. New union organizers were dismissed, goals were set to rekindle the and the workers went back to economy. their 12-hour shifts after nearly fivemonths. Not only did local residents realize the damage done to the The Homestead Strike was just environment, but the nation as a the beginning of labor unrest in whole was reevaluating the the United States. The larger quality of its water, air, andsoil picture was of union afteryears of industrial dissatisfactionaround the development. The federal country that culminated in the governmentinitiated a barrageof Steel Strike of 1919, when four environmental protection million workers in the United legislation in the Post-Industrial States were either on strikeor Era: the Clean Air Act (1963), locked out of their mills (Trager, National Environmental Policy 1994). Act (1970), CleanWater Act (1972), SafeDrinking Water Act The Monongahela River Valley (1974), SMCRA (1977), and typified the state of miners and CERCLA (1980). These federal steelworkers in America and acts reflectedthe changein their fightfor fairer contracts and political climate toward better working conditions. U.S. environmental concerns. Steel finallyreduced its 12-hour work day to 8 hours in 1923, In sync with national attitudes, followingthe lead set by westernPennsylvania politicians American Rolling Mill in 1916 were focusedon their own (Trager, 1994). renaissancebased on reclaiming the riverfrontsand urban 6. Post-IndustrialEra (1960- renewal. The rivers were Present) paramountto Pittsburgh's AfterWorld WarII, industrial RenaissanceI movement because development andthe era of Big high profile projects such as Steel began to decline. The Post­ Point State Parkencouraged new Industrial Era brought the uses of the riverbanks(Muller, realization that the domestic 1989). Projects undertaken market would not sustain a long- during Renaissance I and II were concentratedin the Golden 93 Triangle of the City of Pittsburgh brownfieldsite, shows enormous and included the construction of promise forthe city's research ThreeRivers Stadium and the and development niche. These redevelopment of Station Square. and other riverfront reuse projects along the Monongahela Although the riverfront River are contributors to a redevelopment projects first regional trend which values initiated by RenaissanceI and II riverfront property and were focusedon Pittsburgh, ideas encourages a new relationship for reuse are continuing with between communities, their more varietyand scope in the rivers, economic development, 1990s. Lifestyle changes and recreation, andhistory. increases in leisure time have influencedthe public's perception of the river and riverfront property throughout the Monongahela Valley. Examples of riverfrontreuse can be seen in McKeesport with McKee's Point Parkproposal, in Greensboro with the proposed "riverwalk", in Monongahela with the Aquatorium, andin West Homestead with the Sandcastlecomplex.

The Three Rivers Regatta and Gateway Clipper fleet are entertainment endeavors which reflect attitudinal changes towardsthe local rivers, and river rowing clubs have made a comeback with a new facilityon Washington's Landing, formerly an industrial pig slaughtering site known as Herr's Island. It has been documented that the Three Rivers Regatta has induced a $59 million impact on the City's business volume and a $36 million impact on the Allegheny County business volume (Tripp, Umbach, & Associates, 1995). The Pittsburgh Technology Center, developed on a

94 VIII. LANDING SITES conditions may change the order in which the potentiallanding As part of their river-based sites were ranked. heritage tourism initiative the SIHCManagement Action Plan Through intensive field calls for the development of river investigation and data collection, landing sites as the gateway into a list of potential landing sites study corridor communities. was developed for review (Table These landings also present the 23). This list identifies what opportunity for commuter transit. Mackin considered to be all This is particularlyimportant potential landing sites. It must be since the Monongahela River noted that for each potential could serve as a linkbetween the landing site location, the entire county-operatedtransit systems, community was analyzed, not where it is currentlyseen as a specific locations withinthe barrier to these connections. community.

Mackin evaluated sites Objectivecriteria were developed throughout the study corridor as to rate each of these potential potentiallanding locations. This landing sites and identify which evaluation addressed only had the greatest potential for existing conditions. The development at the time of this evaluation method was developed study. Thecriteria included a to allow reassessment by SIHC, combination of variables such as based on the same objective amenities, nearby historical and criteria on an as-needed basis. cultural attributes, infrastructure Reassessment on a differingset of

95 characteristics, andpotential fundingavailability (evaluation criteria are contained in Appendix J). Application of the review criteria to the 33 potential landing sites resulted in ten sites being recommended as locations forprimary landings (Table 24).

The recommended landing sites represent all geographic areas of the MonongahelaValley with at least _one primary landingin each pool. All of the recommended landingsare related to the SIHC journeyareas and can be tied to activities plannedwithin the Journeyareas.

In addition to the recommended landingsthere were six additional potential landingsbeing considered outside the study corridor. Contact with the Pittsburgh City Planning Department indicated that landing sites are being considered at the South Side LTV Works (27th Street), Station Square, Nine Mile Run, Mon Wharf(at SmithfieldSt. Bridge), Point State Park, andPittsburgh Technology Center in the City of Pittsburgh. These sites would provide access forRivers of Steel tours� as well as anopportunity forcommuter transit to the employment centers in Pittsburgh.

Table 25 was developed in order to better plan forpotential landings by identifyingdistances between locations along the corridor.

96 Table 23 Primary and Secondary Landing Sites

Point Marion 90 6 Dunkard Creek 87 6 Friendship Hill 85 6 New Geneva 85 6 Greensboro 84.5 6

Masontown at Grays 81 5 Landing Masontown at Hatfield 79 5 Nemacolin Mines 76.5 5 Isabella 72 5 Crucible 70 5 Rices Landing 68 5 Fredericktown/Ten Mile 65 5

Brownsville 56 4 California/CoalCenter 52 4 · Allenport 47 4 Fayette City 46 4 Lower Speers 43.5 4 Belle Vernon 43.5 4 Charleroi 42 or41 4

Monessen 40.5 3 Donora 37 3 Monongahela 32 3 New Eagle 30 3

Elizabeth 23 2 Clairton 20 2 Glassport 19 2 McKeesport 15 2 . Duquesne 13 2 Port Perry/Braddock 11.5 2

Kennywood 11 1 Carrie Furnace/Rankin 9 1 Nine Mile Run 8 1 Homestead 7.5 1 Sandcastle 6 1

97 Table 24 Primary Landing Sites

98 Table 25 Mileage Chart

53 61 65 67 67 41 49 49 53 54 55 55 56 27 35 35 39 40 41 41 42 33 33 37 38 39 39 40 36 25 29 30 31 31 32 53 41 27 8 12 13 14 14 15 61 49 35 5 6 6 8 61 49 35 33 8 4 7 7 7 65 53 39 37 29 12 2 3 66 54 40 38 30 13 5 2 3 67 55 41 39 31 14 6 7 67 55 41 39 31 14 6 7 2 68 56 42 40 32 15 7 8 3 3 Mileage in River Miles.

99 IX. ISSUES, CONCERNS, uses forthe abandoned riverfront CONSTRAINTS,AND sites (SPRPC, 1994b). New OPPORTUNITIES multi-use zoning within brownfieldsalong the river provides an opportunity to bridge A. Project Area Characteristics this gap by allowing these uses to The municipalities along the coexist. New companies would MonongahelaRiver have provide municipal tax revenue experienced a population decline while the recreation amenities due to the closing of the mills would attract additional people to andmines. The 1990 U.S. the municipality andimprove the Census indicates that between overall quality of life,making the 1980 and1990 California community anattractive place to Borough was the only study live, work, andinvest. corridor municipality to witness a growthin population. Other B. Land Resources municipalities have lost as much Hazardousand toxic waste as 27 percent of their population, production has been a long­ and39 of 65 municipalities lost standingproblem withinthe over 10 percent of their MonongahelaValley. According respective populations during to Percival et al. (1996) "the that decade. volumes andtoxicity of industrial andmunicipal waste streams Sudden population loss has left increased dramaticallyafter vacanthousing, commercial World WarII". For decades, buildings, andindustrial industrialwastes were disposed structures which have contributed in the least expensive, most to the lack of private investment convenient fashion possible with within the river municipalities. little or no concerngiven to the According to SPRPC, skilled environment, the community, or workers in these towns have its residents. foundthemselves in an employment gap, leftunqualified Despite stricter controls forhigh paying jobs and governingthe managementof overqualifiedfor unskilled jobs. hazardouswastes, cleanup ofpast Faced with this problem, many materials may takedecades. skilled workers have chosen to Numerous hazardousand toxic leave the region in searchof new waste sites were identifiedwithin employment. the study corridor including three CERCLA sites, 22 miscellaneous Since 1990 riverfrontuse has sites identifiedby ACOE, and been rethought, andplans are one active residual waste landfill. developing to claim areas for Although varyinglevels of public use. Conflictshave arisen contaminationmay exist at these over public recreation and private

100 sites they were all regulated or at Reclamation Fund (Operation various stages of reclamation by Scarlift)was initiated forthe PADEP. treatment, reclamation, regrading andrevegetating, and sealing of Brownfields located within the abandoned mines. study corridor represented Approximately $120 million of resources for futureeconomic this fundwas earmarked forthe andrecreational development. prevention, control, and Due to their proximity to the elimination ofAMD. In 1996 river, manyof these brownfields PADEP reported that were equipped with moorings, approximately $78 million has river terminals, docks, etc. In been contracted (Frey, 1996). some instances, these features may provide the necessary Additionally, Pennsylvania infrastructure where river access receives approximately $19 is part of a redevelopment plan. million per yearfrom the Federal In addition, PA Act 2 establishes Office of SurfaceMining (OSM) standard procedures for through the Surface Mining remediation, release ofliability, Control andReclamation Act of andfinancial assistance for 1977 (SMCRA). These fundsare interested parties to conduct direct proceeds fromactive voluntary cleanups. mining operations andare allocated to states with active As hazardous areas, abandoned Abandoned Mine Land(AML) mine sites within the study programs, such as Pennsylvania. corridor also represented However, monies are potential redevelopment areas. appropriated on a priority basis, Reclaiming these sites can and even then, only to Priority 1, improve hazardousconditions, 2, and 3 sites as defined by OSM. while utilizing their redevelopment potential. There In an interview with the Port of are multiple abandoned mine Pittsburgh they identified the reclamationefforts that lack of a comprehensive incorporatetechniques like inventory ofdevelopment sites as refilling, regrading, and a problem when interested revegetation. In addition, a groupsbegin looking in the area. variety ofvolunteer special The Port ofPittsburgh indicated interest, federal andstate that a comprehensive inventory government, anduniversity should be preparedidentifying all research programsare ongoing to attributes of a sites such as provide technical assistance and available docking facilities, water fundingfor reclamation. depth, acreage, etc.

In 1967, the $500 million Land There were numerous abandoned andWater Conservation and bargesalong the river which are 101 both visible along shore and sunk of particularconcern in on the river bottoms. These municipalities that may barges present a variety of experience growth projected with problems including obstructions the Mon-Fayette Expressway. to development, general hazards, These communities may be ill­ andvisual blight of the shoreline. prepared forthe results and The Port of Pittsburgh had begun impacts of this transportation a process to identifythe abandon project if they do not takesteps barges and establish a process by to ensure proper planning. which to remove them. At the time of this study the Port of These land use and zoning Pittsburgh was in the process of conflictsshould be addressed as setting up a private foundation to they limit development acquire fundsfor the removal of opportunities. Additionally,land the barges. The process of use on adjacent properties are removing the barges will be limited because of the costly andlengthy, additional incompatibility of industrial uses. fundingsources available, Finally, several communities' outside of private contributions, zoning ordinancesdid not make . will expedite the removal and the best use of existing improve the overall river quality. environmental conditions. Many communities have leftabandoned Although many riverfront riverfrontindustrial sites zoned municipalities had established industrial in hopes that they will zoning ordinances, 15 be reactivated. These municipalities did not have any communities should evaluate the formof land use control. The 15 potential forother river based municipalities were located in redevelopment opportunities Washington and Greene counties beyond industrial, as it may open and comprised of nearly40 miles access to the river. of riverfront along the western bank. These unzoned lands C. Water Resources represented approximately 25 Although the one-hundred and percent of all the riverfront five-hundredyear floodplains property within the project area. were confinedbetween narrow Manymunicipalities had regions of the river valley, outdated zoning ordinances that existing developments did occur did not reflectcurrent conditions. within the floodplainsat There is a particular concernin locations like Point Marion, muni-cipalities which contain Greensboro, East Bethlehem, brownfieldsites that had not West Brownsville, Brownsville, adapted their zoning regulations California,Coal Center, and to encouragereuse of these McKeesport. As evidenced by developments. This lack of historical flood events on the zoning or outdated zoning is also 102 Monongahela River, these low­ affectthe existing floodplains. lying areas often sustain Furthermore, ACOE stressedthat significant property damage. the lock and dam system was Future development and land use never designed or intended to plans should be coordinated with manage floodwaters and that the the FEMA and the National modifications will neither benefit Flood Insurance Program to nor harm floodcontrol (W. determine floodplain and special Loehline, ACOE, personal floodhazard areas within the communication, February, 1998). corridor. It has been emphasized that the Existing development could use state of water quality monitoring emergency flood response data forthe Monongahela River resources. The NWS operates basin sufferedfrom numerous river forecastpoints at several inadequacies. Several sources of locations along the Monongahela chemical, physical, and biological River. This informationis data were available for the study available through recorded corridor; however, the collection messages, the NWS internetsite of data throughout the basin was (www.nws.noaa.gov.er.pitt), and a highly decentralized process. NOAA weather radio. As a direct result of this decentralization, data quality and The navigational improvements consistency was often on the Monongahela are expected compromised. to have an impact on existing water elevations inPools No. 2 Agencies like PADEP and PFBC, and 3. ACOE indicated that and programs like NA WQA did changes in elevation will be maintain water quality stations negligible however, and will not along the Monongahela with the goal of detecting trends, assessinggeneral water quality, and reporting on theeffectiveness of water quality programs. In addition, federal,state, and private entities have conducted a variety of isolated water quality studies with specificgoals in mind. As summarized in this plan, these studiesfocused on indicators such as fishand macroinvertebrate communities, contamination of sediments by heavy metals and organic compounds, and standard water

103 chemistry parameters. However, quality. [There is also] wide Miko & Lorson indicated that, recognition of the need to "given the numerous improve water-quality monitoring anthropogenicinfluences upon to accomplish clearlydefined the aquatic resources of the objectives and to obtain better ambient compliance Monongahela River, describing information... (or forecasting)... may require a more complex arrayof The ITFM's message was clear: hydrologic, water chemistryand combining data fromall of the foragefish data to yield various studiesand agency reasonable descriptions ...indeed monitoring programsrepresents a greater quantification of statistical challenge due to the biological data andmore in-depth myriad of protocols employed by examination of flowand water researchers, andalso presents a quality data will be necessary". question of validity. Although the AmericanChemical Society When examined on a case-by­ Committee on Environmental case basis each of these studies Improvement ( cited in Barcelona, used a specificresearch protocol 1988) indicated that there was no designedto evaluate a generally acceptable strategy for predetermined object andanswer developing water quality questions related to the specific protocols, the following goals of the study. Difficulties minimum requirements were arose when attempting to recommended: compile a survey of water quality forthe study corridor due to the • a proper statistical design incompatibility of methods used which accounts for the goals to collect and analyze data. With of the study the possible exception of the • specificinstructions for PADEP, PFBC, andNA WQA collecting, labeling, and programs, the majority of preserving samples research presented was not • training of personnel in intended to provide an overall researchdesign and analysis picture of the Monongahela's • detailed written protocols waters. In 1997 the IntergovernmentalTask Force on A watershed-based approach to Monitoring Water Quality water quality monitoring forthe (ITFM) pointed out that: Monongahela must begin with goal-oriented monitoring and ... agreement is widespread that indicators that canaddress water existingdata programs cannot be added together to provide all the pollution froma more global informationneeded to answer the orientation. This type of more recent complex questions approach may help to validate about national or regional water claims and implement strategies

104 directed at changingthe image of DamNo. 3. Whenimplemented, the Monongahela as a polluted, the project will have major industrial river. effects on water quality and the hydrology of the river. The most Many mine abatement projects visible changeresulting from andinvestigations have been ACOE's recommended planwill conducted throughout the be changes in pool elevations. Monongahelabasin. Water According to ACOE estimates, quality monitoring conducted by Pool No. 2 was expected to rise P ADEP andNA WQA indicated anaverage of 2 feetover its that mine discharges were entire length andPool No. 3 was randomly distributed throughout expected to lower anaverage of 5 the watershed. In fact, PADEP feetdue to the removal of Locks has identifiedapproximately and DamNo. 3. The shiftingof 1000 "problem areas" throughout these pool levels was expected to the basin (P. Milavec, personal require the relocation or communication, February 11, adjustment of a varietyof 1998). facilitiesand structuresincluding railroads, municipal water The magnitude of AMD, intakes, stormsewers, especially in the upper commercial facilities,and Monongahela, has decreased recreational facilities. considerably due to a greater understandingof the interrelated Environmental consequences processes producing AMDand associated with the planincluded advancementsin abatement the loss of beneficialtailwater technologies, (Miko & Lorson, habitat below Dam No. 3, the 1994; ACOE, 1991; USGS, degradation of uplandhabitats 1997a; D. Williams,USGS, used as disposal areas, temporary personal communication, increases in turbidity andthe December 10, 1997). Despite possible liberation of these gains, AMD represented contaminated sediments during the single-most significantsource dredging operations, reduced of water pollution within the levels of dissolved oxygen MonongahelaRiver basin (Frey, resulting fromthe removal of 1994). Locks andDam No. 3, loss of submerged riverine and riparian In 1991, ACOE completed the wetland habitat, andthe loss of Lower MonongahelaRiver recreational access points. Navigation System Feasibility Study. This proposal has since ACOE in conjunctionwith EPA, received congressional approval PADEP, PFBC, and USFWS has andwill involve the upgrade of outlined a series of mitigation Locks andDams No. 2 and 4, strategies; nevertheless, due to andthe removal of Locks and the project's magnitudeand 105 scope, the potential forlong­ D. Biological Resources term, negative environmental The continuing invasion of the impacts existed. As Miko & riparianzone by aggressive Lorson (1994) describe: foreignplants, such as Japanese " ...commercial navigation knotweed(Polygonum impacts supersede environmental cuspidatum) and garlicmustard impacts [ on the Monongahela]". (Alliaria officina/is), has significantlydegraded the Percival et al. (1996) described diversity and habitat quality of the "shiftto waterborne the associated understory. methods" of waste disposal as a Japanese knotweedis native to "major concern"throughout the easternAsia (Seiger, 1997). First United States. Both treated and introduced to North America in untreatedsewage effluent the late 19th century, this species represented a water quality becamea serious problem in the problem within the easternU.S. Once established, it Monongahela. Throughout much formslarge standswhich of thestudy corridor displace all native vegetation. communities were served by Stands of Japaneseknotweed municipalwastewater treatment have been virtually impossible to facilities. Nonetheless,even eradicate. The presence of this treatedwastewaters oftencontain noxious, invasive plantmay high levels of heavy metals, result in increased erosion nutrients, andsediment material. problems. Due to shallow Combined with the increased rooting andpoor bank temperaturesfound throughout stabilization, It replaces native the lower Monongahela, nutrients herbaceous vegetation on many found in wastewater oftenplaced banks, which canleave an furtherdemands on dissolved exposed bankwhich could be oxygen concentrations. eroded during stormevents.

Several isolated areasthroughout Zebra mussels (Dreissena the study corridor lacked polymorpha) have been identified municipal treatmentservice. As in Lock andDam No. 3 in a result, on-lot septic systems and Elizabeth. Although there were direct ''wildcat" lines introduced only 14 mussels collected at this pollutants into the river. lock, the potential exists for Although reports of illness due to migrationby the free-swimming pathogens in the river were rare, veligers or larvae into the in untreated sewage they pose remaining portions of the river potential humanand ecological (PADEP, 1997b). Problems health risks. result when zebra mussels block pipe intakes at public water systems or power plants, as well

106 as when the filter-feeding There are several government mussels reduce nutrient levels in agencies that canbe contacted for water bodies and native species further information on that rely on these nutrients can maintaining a riparianforest not sustain themselves. The buffersuch as the USDA, the Asian clam cancreate the same USFWS, the Natural Resource complications as the zebra Conservation Service, and mussel. DCNR. It is critical to the maintenanceand protection of The ACOE Lock and Dam riparianforested buffers that project could significantlyalter private landownersalong the the aquatic habitat of the riverside are provided with Monongahela River by dredging, knowledgeand assistance excavating, eliminating tailwater regardingthe benefitsand effects habitat, and changing pool levels. of these systems. The loss of the tailwater habitat could create a significantly Of the fivecounties located negative impact on the improving within the study corridor,only fish community. ACOE , in two participatedin a Natural coordination with the USFWS, Heritage Inventory; Allegheny has plansto compensate forthis and Washington. Westmoreland loss of tailwater habitat by andFayette Counties beganthe increasing the amount of process to complete aninventory, shoreline-debris zone or shallow while Greene County has no water habitat and enhancingthe plansto conduct the study. The fishery by placement of fish reefs purpose of the inventory is to andrubble beds. identifyand present areaswith unique natural resources. In turn, Forested buffers, which exist WPC is hoping that this along much of the study corridor, designation, althoughit holds no help improve water quality, but legal protection, will deter proper maintenance, developers frombuilding in these management, and integration areas. with other river conservation techniques is also required. E. Cultural Resources Riparianforest buffers alone can not solve water quality problems. 1. Recreational Resources There must be an integrated With the reintroduction of the ecosystem approach including river-based recreation industry, sediment and erosion plans, numerous issues were raised such AMDabatement projects and as recreational safety, proper land management degradationof the river, limited techniques. access to the river areas,and new recreational opportunities.

107 Abandoned coal conveyors, Obstacles to recreational use tipples and bargetie-offs exist both in andout of the river. represent safety concerns for Railroad tracks andsteep slopes both the shipping industry and generally restrict public access to the recreation industry. the river throughout the corridor. Towboats, pushing anaverage of There area number of private six barges, have difficultyin household docks and points of seeing and reacting to the river access, but public access by recreational users of the river. swimmers, boaters andfishermen Both the commercial shipping is limited within the study industryand the recreation corridor. Limited public access industry are concerned with to the river is due to land safetyand future changes to the ownership, industrial use, shipping industry. pollution, railroads, highways, and steep slopes. Other concernsare related to the acquisition of operator licenses, Recreational facilitiesalso the attendance of boater safety present challenges to courses, andthe use of alcohol development opportunities along while boating. While these the river andredevelopment at simple measures to ensure the brownfieldsites. Conflicts safetyof the recreational users of between pedestrian/bikersand the river arerequired, it has been industrialloading operations and suggested that they arerarely the liability resulting fromthese enforced. conflictsare of paramount concern. An interview with Port The introduction of personal of Pittsburgh indicated that trails watercrafts(PWC) has also established at the rivers edge on added to safetyconcerns on the potential redevelopment sites MonongahelaRiver. In 1997, 27 such as the Duquesne City percent of all boating accidents Center andMcKeesport, will involved at least one PWC and strongly impact the ability of 43 percent of all reported industries reliant on river based collisions between boats transportationto develop, involved at least one PWC narrowingopportunities for (PFB'C, 1998). The PFBC has development. already adopted regulations for an age restriction forpersons The abandonedferry locations, under 15 years of age andare located mostly in the southern considering even stricter half of the study corridor, could regulations aimed at requiring a provide additional, unmaintained PWC safetyclass forany one access to the river. Although intending to operate these these abandonedferry landings watercraft. arenot readily noticeable, they

108 represent a time in history when tourism and promotion. In 1998, the shores and communities this initiative was still along the Monongahela were undergoing a preliminary trialon connected by a simpler form of the SusquehannaRiver. transportation. There are numerous proposals for As Table 18 indicates, the ramps, marinas and riverfront distribution of recreational parks as discussed in the facilitiesalong the Monongahela Recreation section of this report. River corridor appearsto be These proposals are indications concentrated in Pools 3, 4 and 5. that the communities in the In analyzing population, it is region are interested in apparentthat certain areasof the improving public access anduse river, particularlyPools 1, 2, and of the river (Table 26). 5 areunder servedfor public boat launches. The firstfour pools of In discussions with Mackin and the river, which are also the most SIHC,Kennywood Park,which populated, could use at least two operates the Sandcastlewater new rampseach, while Pool 5 park,expressed a willingnessto needs at least one new ramp. provide space for a public boat Pool 6 appearsto contain enough launch adjacent to the parking public access forthe number of area at Sandcastle. In a past people located nearby. overtureto the City of Pittsburgh, where the property is located, The PFBC Water Trails Initiative Kennywoodindicated that they may provide an excellent would help pay forthe opportunityto join with agency construction of the launch area personnelin creating anytype of and provide maintenanceand boat tours. Promotion, funding, security while the parkwas in conservation and other positive operation. Although the City benefits of this programcould be was unwilling to entertain put to use on the Monongahela Kennywood's offer at that time, River. This programincludes the this launch would provide public designationof a statewide access, parkingfor boat trailers network of water trailsto within the Pittsburgh pool and enhancethe recreational would relieve pressures on other experiences of theregion while ramps within the area, which is attracting traveling andtourism greatly underserved forboat dollars. Under this initiative, access at this time. specific information about designated water trails, including The ACOE Lock andDam camping, interesting sites, trail project requires the adaptation of heads, andother pertinent several private facilities informationwould be collected including the Mon-Valley and complied into a brochure for 109 Table 26 Recreation Proposals

Fredericktown Marina LuzerneTownship BoatRamp Brownsville Wharf Brownsville Marina Charleroi Promenade andTower Park Monessen PFBCRamp ForwardTownship Marina Donora Municipal Park & Ramp McKeesport McKee's Point Park McKeesport Youghiogheny LinearPark Kennywood Park Boat ramp Kennywood Park Marina

Speedboat Club, Elizabeth Boat Also impacted by this project Club, PineRun OutboardClub, will be fivepublic rampslocated EvanFord Development, Molnar in New Eagle, Monongahela, Marina, Beach Club Marina, Black Diamond,Forward MonongahelaMariners Boat Township, andWebster. Club, Marina One Corp., and Although, the ACOE is Frank & Fey Irey Marina. Under responsible formitigation and Section 10 of the River and financialfunding of these public Harbor Act of 1899, private facilities,it is importantto keep facilitiesare not entitled to updated on the progress of the compensation for modifications mitigation efforts. resulting froma federalproject. Therefore, remedying these With the advent of railways and adjustments is the responsibility the industrialage, the of the private facilities. Due to MonongahelaRiver became the impacts to several inundated with railroads. As the commercial docks, the Port of coal andsteel industriesdeclined, Pittsburgh Commission has set manyof the railroads were left up a revolving low interest loan abandoned. This provides an fundto assist the private opportunityto create new commercial interests affectedby recreational trails. The this project. Although, these abandoned railroads arealready measures may never be clearedspaces that had relatively undertaken due to the cost little to no gradeassociated with associated with them. them. Due to the numerous railroad companiesin the area and conflictingownership and

110 usage information, the length and in the Monongahela Valley, locations of abandonedrailroads where so many worthwhile were unable to be determined. structures exist.

2. Historical & Cultural Official recognitioncan be Historical resource conservation deceiving. For example, a is based on three issues: municipality may have sites preservation, officialrecognition, listed on the National Register, andinterpretation. Preservation but they may have been placed includes the physical there as a result of surveys done rehabilitation of structures, by governmentagencies for districtsand sites. Recognition is infrastructureprojects such as done ·through the formalprocess roadways. Therefore, sites which of placing sites andstructures on are listed may not actually be · lists of historical resources. recognizedor valued as a These lists arekept and managed historical resource on the local by groupsat differentpolitical level. By contrast, official levels, local (historical societies), recognition through a state (PHMC), and federal community-based efforttakes a (National Register of Historic certainamount of political will. Places). Interpretation of Communities wishing to have a historical resources means site listed on the National explaining past usage thereby Register must justifyits placing value in it, andincreasing relevanceand followthe formal overall awarenessof its historical nomination process. Thiscan be significance. Interpretation can a much more time consuming takethe formof reusing a effortthan achieving recognition structurefor modem purposes through a local historical society. while maintaining the Most importantly,official architectural integrity of its past. recognition of historic resources does not ensure that they will be Preservation, recognition, and physically restored or protected. interpretationare all occurring to different degrees within the river Interpretationcan be communities. Preservation complicated, as well. A site may effortsare generally be valued by the community commensurate with the amount based on anevent which of financial resources available. occurredthere, such as an Because the cost of rehabilitation uprising during the Whiskey variesgreatly, the desire to Rebellion or a military battle. physically preserve many Interpretationof a structure may structures is restricted. The involve preserving its outward limited availability of fundsfor appearanceand style while using historic preservation is a concern it for a new purpose,or preserving its historical use while 111 changing the physical highlight the building in the appearance. university setting.

Preservation, recognitionand Cultural Conservation interpretation canbe wasted The river communities ofthe effortsif they are not done in Monongahela sharea commercial combination with one another. and industrial past which The Flatiron Building in attractedimmigrants and others, Brownsville is an example of and bonded people through their how successfully combining experiences in mills, warehouses, preservation, recognition and factories, andmines. This interpretationcan yield a formedan identity for residents structurethat serves public ofthe Monongahela Valley, interests andcontributes to despite the ethnic andreligious economic growth. On the other diversity. This identity still hand, a site such as the Pinkerton retains its significance today. Landing Site in Homestead is officially recognized and has The cultureof this region has been outwardly rehabilitated, but taken on a special meaning there is limited interpretation of withinthe larger context of its importancein history and it is southwesternPennsylvania that easily overlooked by Homestead is summed up simply by the term visitors, residents, andriver "Mon Valley". It is this users. A final example ofthe recognitionthat sets importanceof combining the Monongahela Valley residents three aspects ofhistorical and communitiesapart from conservation is the Old Main those ofother southwestern building on the campus of Pennsylvania river valleys with CaliforniaUniversity of industrial pasts. Pennsylvania. This historical building, listed on the National It is difficultto conceptualize Register, was restored and culture as something to preserve. upgraded to maintain its use by SIHC has takenthe lead in theuniversity. The university's attempting to do thisthrough master plan (2003-2009) intends local initiatives and a regional to furtherhighlight the historical strategy. Many important significance of Old Main by aspects ofMonongahelaValley further renovating it. The culture will not be appreciated by University also intends to build depending on historical anaddition to Old Main, and conservation alone, which is why create a new university entryway taking stock in cultural attributes that would direct trafficto Old is important. For example, coal Main (McLachlan, Cornelium, & patch communities arenot Filoni, 1996). This will serve to something unique in the Monongahela Valley, and there 112 may not be effortsto identify, dumps, erosion and preserve, recognize or interpret sedimentation, streamawareness, their individual histories because raw sewage, water quality, and they seem a common entity. promotion of heritage and However, the importance of coal recreation. patch towns is that they represent a niche of culture that is The Monongahela River Plan at significant to the Monongahela Brownsville was conducted by Valley. This and other nuances seven municipalities within the of the valley are something to watershed that joined together to consider, preserve, andcapitalize investigated a 26 mile stretchof on. the river. This plan was completed in November 1997 F. Other Resource Opportunities andwas the firstplan to be included on the Rivers Registry. 1. RiverConservation Plans Some of the mainissues in this Within the last year and a half, plan were sewage, river access, several other river conservation historical recognition, andriver planshave been conducted safety. This plan has also started within the vicinity of the to implement some of their MonongahelaRiver. This offers managementoptions. They are the opportunityof coordinating pursuing a wharf/landingsite and management options andfunding have formeda river rescue team. sources to accomplish a common goal. There were five other The Youghiogheny River conservation planscompleted or Conservation Planinvestigated a being conducted at the time of 46 mile stretchof the river and this report. They arethe included 27 municipalities. This Dunkard Creek Plan, the plan was completed in February, Monongahela River Plan at 1998. The focusof this planwas Brownsville, the Youghiogheny economic development, river RiverPlan, the Nine Mile Run access, water quality, and Plan, andthe Three Rivers Plan. recreation. The Regional Trial Corporation was responsible for The DunkardCreek Plan was thisplan and they have begun to conducted by the Greene County implement some of their ConservationDistrict andis in management options as well. the Final Draft phase. It is anticipated that this report will be The DraftPhase of the Nine Mile completed by the end of 1998. River Conservation Plan was This plan focuses on the underdevelopment as of April of following seven top issues of 1998. The study corridor concernwithin the watershed: includes both the upper and abandoned mine drainage, trash lower reaches and extends from Braddock Avenue in Frick Park 113 to the confluence with the 2. Economic Development Monongahela River. Some Proposals issues of concernidentified in the The City ofPittsburgh has plan include: the extensively complied the Riverfront degraded water quality and Development Plan, which streamhabitat, excessive erosion encompasses a portion ofthe and scouring fromstorm water Monongahela River within the run-off throughoutthe basin, City limits. Within this report, failingsewage lines and several districts have been unauthorized discharges, and designated, the Central district, potential toxic contamination Community districts, industry froman adjacent 20 million ton districts, andgreen districts. slag pile. Each district provides forvarious goals and standardsthat the City The Nine Mile Run Plan ofPittsburgh wants to establish. addresses these and other issues In particular,with the andconcerns with a series Monongahela River, the detailed managementoptions Community district in Nine Mile directed at "protecting, restoring, Run, the Industry region in Hays, andenhancing the biotic, abiotic, and the Green Districtin the cultural, andscenic values ofa Upper Monongahela River areof post-industrial urbanwatershed, interest. and to promote public understanding, appreciation, and As part ofa largerinitiative enjoyment ofthis heritage within directedtowards the a sustainable greenway program" revitalization ofthe Mid-Mon (City ofPittsburgh Department Valley, variousstudies were of City Planning, STUDIO for identifiedwhich focusedon Creative Inquiry, & Carnegie economic development and Museum ofNatural History, marketpotential within the study 1998). corridor. Two ofthese studies,

Leading Mid-Mon Valley The Three Rivers Planis Venture Development currently being conducted on Opportunities (Delta portions ofthe Allegheny, Ohio Development Group & GAI andMonongahela Rivers by the Consultants, [DDG & GAI], City ofPittsburgh and is 1993) and Development Potential anticipatedto be complete in the ofRiver-Based Properties: summer 1999. The focus of this Market Assessment (ZHA, 1988), plan includes anin depth flora investigated several potential and faunaassessment, a historical opportunities throughoutthe review, andrecreational valley and identifiedfour of the utilization ofthe riverfronts. more attractive sites for proposals.

114 Charleroi. Already a The most viable initiatives and functioningcommunity their development perspectives playground facility, plans were as follows: fora festivalmarket place for local merchants, • Pine Oaks Site - A former vendors, andretailers are mine and slag dump area the highlight of this totaling 400 acres, this site proposal. This open-air is located northwest of market would also be Donora, adjacent PA Route complimented by local 837. The proposal includes fairs, exhibits, arts and a mixed use health care crafts, andcarnivals. A _ business andservice park deck hockey facility, with amenities including a marina, andball park golf course, spa, tennis courts, residential • Monongahela Aquatorium developments, and Site - Bordering the eastern restaurants. side the existing Aquatorium in the City of • Gibsonton Site - Described Monongahela,this site -as a premier location for a proposal was recommended riverfrontdevelopment due due to its proximity to the to its proximity to 1-70 and Aquatorium, exceptional high visibility, this 75 acre river access, andthe site was selected for hotel neighboring downtown and franchise restaurant area. Recommendations development. Included in include a riverfront"white the proposal are small tablecloth" restaurant office andresidential tailored specifically toward compliments, a 50 slip boaters andan 80 slip marina, park facilities, and marinawith boat rental. a future rail excursion coordinated with the Steel Valley Heritage Project, which would link the site to cultural and historic sites withinthe region.

• CharleroiTrustees Park Site - The 6 acre parkis located on the MonongahelaRiver southeast of downtown

115 X. MANAGEMENT OPTIONS Create a Steamboat Museum at The followingManagement Options Brownsville. arecontained within a Matrix located This facilitywould be located at in Appendix L. This matrix provides Brownsville, the cradle of the forpotential partners,potential American steamboat-building fundingsources andrecommended industry. The museum would have beginning dates. the potential to be both land and river-based, focusingnot only on the A. Cultural and Historical steamboats themselves, but also on the boat-building process. Facilitate regional coordination between historical groups and The museum would be dedicated to municipalities through PHMC and presenting this colorful and SIHC. important partof our nation's Coordination between local heritage, and relating the story of historical societies, river communities, SIHC, and PHMCin how steamboat building developed in necessaryto create a successful the Monongahela Valley, along with it affectedthe course of strategy forregional development. how Americanhistory. There would be The Rivers of Steel journeyarea numerous opportunities forexhibits organizations can serve as main players in regional coordination on boat building and steamboat travel, including displays on the efforts. history of boat building on the Mon; replicas of the Enterprise, one of the SIHC through their journeyareas firststeamboats to travel the length would act as a clearinghouse for informationand a regional of the Ohio River system to the Gulf organizing body. Through its system of Mexico and the firststeamboat to of consultants andcontacts, SIHC travel fromBrownsville to New Orleans and returnon its own power; would also offertechnical advice on exhibits and festivalson Dixieland how to properly rehabilitate or and other formsof music associated refurbishhistoric structures, where to with steamboat travel; and an annual go for potentjal grant money to engage in historic preservation at the regatta exclusively featuring community level; how determine if a steamboats and paddlewheelers from structure is historic, and how to around the country. nominate it for recognition by In addition to historic interpretation, PHMC. As the state commission the museum could become active in overseeing historical sites and the restoration of steamboats and the structures, PHMCshould play an construction of replica boats if a active role in facilitating marketfor this service exists. As coordination andcommunication part of this process, museum staff . amonghistorical organizationsin the could begin to locate andrestore Monongahela River Valley. early steamboats fromaround the nation. If this was proven to be a viable market, it could be a method 116 of generating revenue forthe scale. SIHC's proposed landing site museum, as well as offering an kiosks are the most obvious place to opportunityfor visitors to learn keep a stock of regional historical firsthandabout the steamboat­ and cultural information. Other building process. localities would be the officesof local and regional historical societies Investigate partnerships with and the Bost Building. Because ACOE for the development of a SIHCis already developing a Lock and Dam Museum. tourism and marketingplan for This facility, whichcould be located Rivers of Steel, they are the most at any of several Rivers of Steel appropriate entity to manage this landing sites would provide information. interpretation of the history of the locks anddams along the river. This Those communities without a local museum would relate the importance history book or pamphlet (such as of the lock anddam systems to all a centennial tribute) should rivers in westernPennsylvania. partner with those that have completed such a project (e.g. It could address earlyefforts to dam Monessen, Charleroi) fortechnical the rivers and the economic forces assistance. that drove these efforts, the This would help document history engineering required to design the froma local perspective and would dams, a discussion of how the locks spark interest within the community. work, different types of locks and It may also uncover items of dams used along the rivers (i.e. historical importancethat have been wicket dams, modem style, etc.), and previously overlooked. In addition how the slackwater system has forthose communities which have changed the character of the rivers. not initiated any historic archives or This museum would also provide an documentation, contacting local opportunityto discuss the canal newspapers is one place to begin system which historicallyexisted assembling informationin along the rivers and the importance preparation fora pamphlet or book. of the commercial shipping industry to western PA, both in the past and Display public artwork. today. It is recommended that areas be set aside within the river communities, Coordinate an exchange of particularlyat landing sites, for historical literature between displaying public art. Public artis a communities in order to market a process that involves local residents regional experience among and when completed candisplay the travelers to the river communities. culture, ideals, andhistory of a Transferring community literature on community. Public art can be historical resources is important as a produced by children, the elderly, strategy to inspire tourism on a larger artistsand non-artistsalike. The public open space that will be 117 created at landingsites, as well as that the signs take on a Rivers of along trails andin new public parks, Steel marking that will unifythe provides an ideal opportunity for corridor resources. permanentor revolving displays by local artists. Signs can also be used in a flagor tapestry fashionto add character to a Communities should selectively commercial district, such as that used focusconservation effortsby on Eighth A venue in Homestead. In identifying their historical the case of Homestead, the street resources, including those which flagsdepict scenes fromthe are listed on the National Register community's industrial past. The of Historic Places and those which designs forflags and tapestries could they would like to see listed. be developed through community art Identifyingstructures remaining projects or contests. fromformer industrial sites, commercial, residential areas is a Research local history to attempt primary task forcommunities to identify sites of exceptional interested in historical and cultural interest forinterpretive sites. preservation. However, selectively An example of this is the former focusingthe community's Parkinson's Ferry site in preservation effortson significant Monongahela. Because the former structures is a better long-term Parkinson's Ferryis celebrated as a strategy than either ignoring all rendezvous site of the Whiskey structures or spreading resources too Rebels, it should be researched by thinly over many structures. the community andsubmitted to the Selective preservation should be PHMCfor listing. Through SIHC or done in a coordinated manner with the municipality, Parkinson's Ferry SIHC, PHMC, and local groups. could developed into aninterpretive site for attracting andinforming Take a regional approach to signs tourists on the significanceof the so that all of the historical Whiskey Rebellion to regional and structures or districts within the national history. This is just one river corridor communities use example of many significanthistoric similar marking techniques to sites within the study corridorwhich identify their historical and could be developed into interpretive cultural resources. areas. Signs are one way to unifythe theme of history andculture in the Preserve local churches as cultural Monongahela River communities. and ethnic symbols of the Signs of a similar style or color Monongahela Valley. scheme canbe used to mark Churches are a significantpart of the structures, trails, or historic districts. landscape in the Monongahela Signs can also be functional listings Valley because they represent the of the choices of attractions within ethnic and religious varietyof each community. It is recommended previous generations who lived, 118 worked, and worshipped in the Design regional history exhibits valley. Today however, churches that can be displayed outside the throughout southwestern Monongahela Valley. Pennsylvania are in danger of being Once the regional historical forgottenas congregational numbers resources areidentified and decline and churches close. This researched, and the informationis trend is not expected to change, managedby the PHMC or SIHC,the which meansthat more church next step would be to design exhibits structures will be put on the resale based on the Monongahela River's market as congregations merge. The history fortraveling displays. There threat of indiscriminate resale ranges arecurrently enough artifacts, frombuyers who remove valuable photographs, and historical data in stained glass oftenthe churches to SIHC'spossession to do this. those that demolish the structures, or Displaying exhibits in Ohio, West allow them to remain unprotected Virginia and easternPennsylvania, fromvandals. would spur interest in tourism in southwesternPennsylvania and the It is important to protect these ethnic Monongahela River valley. and cultural symbols when Accomplishing thiswould require appropriate. Local municipalities approaching organizations such as should take the lead in monitoring the Senator John Heinz Regional the resale andreuse of churches and History Center, which arein a communicate to prospective buyers position to develop and circulate and developers their concernfor such an exhibit. churches as ethnicand cultural artifacts. This can help assure that Address regulatory problems reuse is done with historical and which discourage reuse of cultural sensitivity. Community historical sites. development corporations can also The main regulatory deterrents are play a part in this by including floodplains, local zoning ordinances suitable churches in their and building code ordinances. Other redevelopment plans. issues are Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Resale andreuse can be a positive Occupational Safety Health and lucrative venture, such as the Administration (OSHA) standards Church Brew Works in for elevators. Some of the problems Lawrenceville and the Priory Bed of formermill sites and industrial and Breakfast on the City of river towns areunrealistic to Pittsburgh's North Side. Both of overcome, notably frequently these redevelopment projects were floodedareas. However, local done in the spirit of the original zoning, ADA, and OSHA canoften church structure. be resolved through innovative planningand cooperation between agencies.

119 soul food, which was a part of the Highlight the stoneware industry culture of the manyblacks who of southwestern Pennsylvania. migrated fromthe post-Civil War The salt-glazed stoneware industry South to work in Pittsburgh's once flourishedin the Monongahela factories. The ethnicity of the food Valley. Salt kilns were firedas early gallery facilitiescould also be as the 1830s andat the time reinforcedby selling authentic, stonewareitems fromsouthwestern handmadecrafts or clothingat each. Pennsylvania were a prized commodity. A study should be done If a foodcourt approach is taken,the to locate and explore extant individual units be as representative stoneware andpottery factory booths of ethnic restaurantswhich buildings or kilns. Stoneware already exist throughoutthe region. production was prevalent in New This would encourage visitors to Geneva and Greensboro, as well as samplethe various types of food in towns along the Youghiogheny available at the Steel Heritage River. Interpretive Center at Carrie Furnace, then travel to the actual location of Develop the Steel Heritage the restaurant fora larger meal later. Interpretive Center at Carrie This approach would fulfillone of Furnace. SIHC's goals of moving visitors into This attraction is already plannedby existing communities rather than SIHC, but there are several centralizing facilities. The concept suggestions fordetails of the design would provide another opportunity to which could be incorporated. One improve awarenessof the region's suggestion forthe Steel Heritage heritage. At the same time, it might Interpretive Center at CarrieFurnace also serve to attract more local is the incorporation of an ethnic food visitors, who are simply looking for gallery. Each facilitywould an evening dining experience, to the highlight foodfrom the ethnic Steel Heritage InterpretiveCenter at groups which formedthe basis of the CarrieFurnace. strong neighborhoods in the Pittsburgh area, such as African, If, as planned, a hard-hattour of the Czech, German, Hungarian, Irish, U.S.X. Edgar Thomson Steel Works Italian, Polish, Russian, and is developed as part of the Steel Ukrainian. Each ethnic group would Heritage InterpretiveCenter at Carrie then serve authentic foodswhich Furnace, anotheropportunity for would have been eaten by the creative interpretation could arise. immigrants who worked in the Since a travel link will be needed to valley's mills, preparedby the cover the approximately 1.5 miles descendants of those immigrants. between the two facilities,a replica For example, a restaurant streetcar could be built to shuttle representing the Africanethnic group visitors. This would recreate a would be run andstaffed by people nostalgic part of the region's past of Africandescent and could serve and remind visitors of the method of 120 commuting frequentlyused by of this exists in other areas such as in millworkers. The rubber-tire Florence, Italy. This could be streetcar, which would use existing explored on the Monongahela using streets, could provide additional an inactive railroad bridge or a prospects forcultural interpretation roadway bridge that has been taken as well. It could be routed through out of service. the National Register-eligible Braddock Historic District (which Although other bridges may have the encompasses many industrial era future potential forcombined buildings and mill housing) or past commercial reuse, the abandoned significanthistoric structures such as railroad bridge across the the National Register-listed Monongahela at Clairton is one Braddock Library or the approximate immediate possibility. The bridge location of Braddock's Field, the could support tourism and industrial location of the 1755 French and history-related shops. Indian War battle. Streetcar riders could each be given an information Another possibility is the Carrie kit related to these sites contained in FurnaceHot Metal bridge. This a lunchbox, to further heighten the bridge has been targeted as part of impression of factory workers the Steel Heritage Trail,but commuting to the job. Overall, the incorporating small shops along the streetcar would solve the logistical bridge may add more attraction to difficultyof moving visitors between the route. the two sites while providing many methods of enhancing the B. Economic Development interpretationof the area's heritage. Develop a series of landings for riverboat tours. Investigateand create a trail under As outlined in the Landing Sites theDunlap Creek Bridge in section of this document, Mackin has Brownsville. identifiedthose areas which represent Aside fromits recreational use, this potential landing sites for trailcould be utilized as an interpretative site to explainthe construction, design, and purpose of the Dunlap Bridge, thefirst cast iron bridge in America.

Redevelop an existingbridge to hold small shops. There are many bridges over the Monongahela River which link towns and people. Aside fromreusing extant bridges for pedestrian and bike paths, bridges should be explored for their commercial potential. Example

121 andwalkers using the trail network Evaluate, and where appropriate will bring in more tourism and new acquire and rebuild abandoned economic opportunities. The people ferry sites to be used as future within the study corridor will also ferry launch sites, public boat benefit from completing these trails launches, and interpretive areas. by an increase in recreational With many constraints to river access opportunities andan increase in (topography, railroads, and industrial tourism revenues. use) the ferries represent access points that at one time were operable. Monitor the success and impact of Even though most of the ferry sites economic development projects are overgrown andthe access is along the river. usually not maintained, these areas Publishing an annual report of still present a feasibleway to access completed or ongoing projects, the river. In addition, interpretive documenting their economic impact sites and an alternative to bridges for and hold an annual symposium for river crossing would be made those involved in projects or available. According to the Port of interested in the river. Pittsburgh funding for the reuse and establishment of old ferry sitesis Promote fishing,hiking, and available through the Inter-Modal biking through events. Surface Transportation Efficiency Promoting the natural beauty and Act (!STEA) and the newer TEA21. recreation opportunities of the The Port of Pittsburgh has indicated Monongahela Valley will help to a willingness to assist in acquiring bring new visitors to the river these funds for use at ferry sites. corridor. This will, in turn, help to spur new business development in Link Greensboro and New Geneva the service sector and foster an by ferry. appreciation for the valley's This would actually again institute resources and their potential ferry service which historically economic effect. existed between the two towns. The purpose of the ferry would be to link Fishing tournaments have been the two towns as one Rivers of Steel proven to provide for increased landing site. The main landing tourism and economic profit. PFBC would be at Greensboro and the ferry provides forapplications to hold would tie this landing to New these events. The BASS federation Geneva. This would address several has expressed aninterest in concernsand opportunities. The first promoting such an event. of these is the opportunity to access the Friendship Hill National Historic Site, located adjacent to New Geneva. This will encourage people who visit Albert Gallatin's estate at Friendship Hill to experience both New Geneva, a town foundedby 123 Gallatin, and Greensboro, which has Counties and to provide a large, a historic character of its own. central outlet forthese goods.

In addition, by landingat Greensboro Develop a Market House at and ferryingto New Geneva, a McKeesport. logistical problem can besolved. Because the Monongahela Valley is While Greensboro has excellent river lacking a single facilityor district for access through both anexisting marketing goods, such as the Strip landing and anabandoned lock, New District in Pittsburgh, the Reading Geneva will be difficultto access for Terminal Marketin Philadelphia, or large tour boats due to railroad tracks Tamarack in West Virginia, a market andthe shallow bottom at Georges house could be developed in Creek. A smaller ferryboat will be McKeesport in conjunction with a able to navigate in this area and Rivers of Steel landing site. The deliver visitors to a convenient market house could include food landing point. items (both prepared and unprepared) and other hard goods. Build historically accurate replica Some possibilities include furniture, ferries to connect the river clothing, toys, quilts and crafts, communities and for historic wines, andmicrobrewed beers. A interpretation. particular focusshould be As noted in the land use portion of maintained on selling either locally­ this document, there are few bridges made goods or non-mass produced located along the Monongahela goods, or both. This will add to the River to connect river communities. overall attraction of the market house By reestablishing the ferries, an to consumers and help to avoid a interesting andhistorically 'flea market' atmosphere. significant way of connecting communities could be accomplished. McKeesport is suggested as the market house site fortwo reasons. Promote a Farmers' Market in The firstis accessibility to a large Mid-Monongahela Valley. population area. This is an important This would be of lesser scale than the element to get products to the site market house described above and and to attract a maximum number of would only sell locally-farmed customers. The second reason to produce. The selection of the Mid­ locate in McKeesport is that the Monongahela Valley for the site market house will require a very serves two purposes. The firstis to large building or buildings, which locate the marketin a densely already exist along McKeesport's populated areain order to attract a waterfront. maximum number of consumers. The second is to serve the large number of agricultural operations which operate in Greene, Fayette, Washington, and Westmoreland 124 Coordinate any planned and McKeesport more aware of this development projects that have the problem and alert them of proper possibility of being impacted by procedures in floodemergencies. the Mon-Fayette Expressway with Other education initiatives and the Pennsylvania Turnpike informationsessions may be Commission (PTC). provided by FEMA, NOAA,and By coordinating with PTC, they can ACOE. see that new projects will be considered during the highway Promote an essay and/or photo design process. contest throughout school districts within the Monongahela River C. Education corridor. Informthe public of the value of An essay or photo contest would the resources of the Monongahela focus on stewardship of the river. River Valley. Contests could be forelementary and Publish a monthly newsletter high school age students. Themes discussing projects related to water such as "My view of the river" and quality monitoring,AMD "How the river has affectedmy life" reclamationprojects, recreational would be considered focusing activities, cultural activities, and attention on river conservation and areasof historical interest. stewardship. Prizes forelementary age students might include family Initiate educational programs on passes to regional attractions such as floodsand floodplaindevelopment river tours, history centers or science which include "flood emergency centers. Awardsfor high school response" educational materials students might include scholarships and floodawareness seminars for forcontinuing education. residents and recreational river users. Educate land owners and Flood awareness and prevention municipalities on the importance seminarsshould be presented in of riparian buffers. different formats to local residents, Riparianbuffers are vital to the land owners, and municipal figures. natural process of filteringrun-off and pollution and maintaininga The National Weather Service healthy waterway. Therefore, provides free flood awareness educational courses, workshops, and seminars for communities located literature should be distributed to along rivers andstreams in western local land ownersand municipalities. Pennsylvania. Arranging these Riparian buffersare more likely to seminarswill help make people in be valued and encouraged once their flood-pronecommunities such as crucial role in the ecosystem is Point Marion, Greensboro, East understood. Bethlehem, West Brownsville, Brownsville, California, Coal Center,

125 Create and distribute an recreational experience, and the educational pamphlet describing economy. the potential threat and actions to maintain, the zebra mussel and the Create a Monongahela River Asian clam. summer camp program. With the potential threat of the zebra There aremore andmore summer mussels and Asian clam, public camps that relate to themes, such as awareness need to be raised. An space camps or science camps. This informational pamphlet discussing programwould be gearedtoward this species and the concerns elementary school children and surroundingit could possibly be would focus on the river and its distributed through PFBC in their environment. Students could stay on fishing and boating handbooks. This house boats forthree days to a week, would reach a great deal of the river with each day focusingon different based recreational users and provide aspects of the MonongahelaRiver. them with the knowledge to properly Educational activities would include remove the animals from the ballast environmental issues such as of their boats so as not to abandoned mines, aquatic lifeand accidentally aid in the distribution of forestedriparian buffers; historic the species, as well as other pertinent events such as the Whiskey information. Rebellion, Industrial Revolution, and the Battle of Homestead; navigation Promote water quality on the river; and the lock and dam improvements with an emphasis systems. on economic benefits. While a direct causal relationship Develop a River Environment between water quality and economic Center to educate the public about benefit cannot be accurately the past and present conditions of quantified, data relating to the the regions rivers. economic importanceof fishing and This facilitycould be located at any boating in Pennsylvania does of the Rivers of Steel landing sites demonstrate a connection. In 1996, and would focuson interpretingthe direct trip and equipment revenues natural environment of western fromfishing and boating activities Pennsylvania's rivers and the totaled over $2 billion statewide changes brought about in that (Frey, 1996). Economic benefitsare environment by human actions. complemented by improved water Topics fordisplay could include quality, increased water recreation, abandoned mine drainage andits improved aesthetics, and more viable effectson aquatic systems; the fish, bird, and mammalpopulations. historic impacts of industrial effluent Though costly, continued on the rivers; floodingand its effects, improvements in water quality including how floodingpatterns can directly andindirectly support the change when fillis placed within betterment of river resources, the floodplainsand how floodcontrol dams have helped to regulate one of 126 the most severe flood risk areas in D. Natural Resources the United States; riparian forest Develop a watershed database to buffersand how they function to coordinate conservation activities protect water quality; subaquatic among governmental agencies, vegetation and its importance to the private organizations, and the river ecosystem; the fishand other general public. aquatic animals that inhabit the river; As local andregional governments threatened and endangeredspecies and communities become that occur in and along area increasingly cognizant of the waterways; and the impact of zebra condition of their surfacewaters, the mussels and other non-native species centralization of informationand on the ecology of the river. It is resources will become an effective possible that many of these items vehicle forcoordinating restoration could be displayed through the use of and preservation efforts,pooling a large aquarium that would recreate technical resources, conducting a river bottom habitat and use native educational programs, and providing fish andplant species. This would resource contacts and solutions for allow visitors to enjoy a glimpse of various problems related to what occurs below the surfaceof the watershed conservation. waterways on which they will be traveling. SIHC would functionas a resource center and or clearing-house forthe Another possible method for archiving and distribution of water accomplishing this would be to quality data and information. This create anunderwater riverwalk as option could be modeled aftergroups part of the River Environment such as Pennsylvania Environmental Center. Visitors could descend steps Council's Allegheny Watershed to enter a Plexiglas-walled, Network which deals with issues underwater room fromwhich the such as public involvement, river could be viewed. This would watershed economics, government eliminate the need to recreate the roles, water quality, andaquatic river environment on land by placing ecosystems. visitors directly in the river. The underwater riverwalk also offersthe Establish a relationship with the advantage of being an all-season Appalachian Clean Streams attraction since it would be Initiative. completely enclosed and buffered In cooperation with the EPA's Mine fromtemperature extremes by the Drainage Program, the U.S. OSM river itself. signed an agreement in 1995 "for future cooperative efforts"to address AMD. The result was the Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative which specificallytargets cleanup efforts on streamsaffected by AMD.

127 By fostering coordination between program whereby property owners all parties interested in correcting the and interested conservation groups problems associated with mine could adopt a river section, with the drainage, the initiative raises public goal of managing cleanupefforts and awareness,targets streams and conservation. Local municipalities watersheds affected by AMD, and groups such as the Boy and Girl educates about the application of the Scouts of America, or Rotary and best available technology, supports Lions Clubs could be approached for efforts to mine and reclaim their assistance. abandoned sites, and evaluates the status of ongoing efforts. Coordinate with PADEP's Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation Initiate and complete Natural to identify "Problem Area" Heritage Inventories for abandoned mine sites within the Westmoreland, Fayette, and study corridor forreclamation and Greene Counties through Western funding prioritization. Pennsylvania Conservancy. This option is needed to identifythe By completing these inventories, all location of priority sites within the of the counties surrounding the study corridor and to accurately Monongahela River will have an establish a reclamation hierarchy inventory of the unique and high based upon the level of hazardat diversity areas. This will help to each site. define areas open for development without impacting these natural Investigate the potential for environments. It will also foster utilizing abandoned tipples and knowledge and appreciation of the other structures as public fishing existing resources. These inventories piers. may also identifyinteresting areas to There are numerous abandoned be used as educational classrooms. industrial structures along Monongahela River that could be Implement a volunteer trash utilized as fishingpiers. Thiswould removal or land stewardship require investigating ownership, program to clean and preserve the safety, andfeasibility issues. river corridor. Unauthorized dumping and litter was Develop fishingaccess at public observed throughout the study parks. corridor. Although not a significant This could be accomplished through source of water pollution, it did utilizing existing structures or represent a severe visual degradation. providing fishing piers anddocking A simple, cost effective solution is to space. Fishing groups and implement a program like the municipalities could provide for Y oughiogheny River Sweep which is potential partenerships. an annual, volunteer event to remove discardeddebris. Another solution is to institute a river corridor steward 128 Encourage citizenmonitoring and Identify and remove abandoned reporting of industrial and barges along the river. residential effluentviolations. Identifyorganizations and potential As described throughout this plan, fundingsources, both public and water pollution (specificallyeffluent private, that will remove abandon discharge) is managed by a barges along the river. This program complicated network of would eliminate visual blight, environmental agencies and provide areas for additional regulations. Cumulatively, this development opportunities and framework attempts to provide provide for the opportunityof protection fromfurther degradation adaptive reuse of the barges. and continued improvements in water quality. Nonetheless, it is Encourage existing water quality impossible forregulatory bodies to monitoring programs and oversee every individual resident and regulatory agencies to implement industry within the study corridor. monitoring strategies that use the Citizen monitoring and policing is recommendations and outline one of the most efficient, cost proposed by the ITFM. effectivemeans of identifying Water quality monitoring on the environmental violations. In fact, a Monongahela River has suffered substantial amount of environmental fromnumerous problems as legislation (including the Clean identifiedin the Water Resources Water Act) contains provisions section of this plan. These authorizing citizen suits against inadequacies arenot unique to the individual violators, as well as the Monongahela basin however. DEP and EPA "for failureto perform Numerous government agencies, a nondiscretionary duty" (Percival et researchers, and private al., 1996). organizations have become increasingly cognizantof the status If implemented, thisoption could and current trends in water quality have a two pronged effect. First, monitoring throughout the U.S. The residents within the study corridor EPA itself has criticized the lack of would be assisting regulatory bodies goal directed monitoring and in the identification of suspected comparability of data. violations. This heightened public awareness towards effluent This recommendation is derived violations would serve to deter future fromthe ITFM's six yearlong illegal discharges. Second, by taking review and evaluation of water an active role in the regulation of quality monitoring activities water pollution within their nationwide. Manyof the respective communities, citizens fundamental changesrecommended would be in a better position to lobby by the ITFM were applicable to regulatory agencies to take a harder situations on the Monongahela. A line towards violations. complete copy of the ITFM's report is contained in Appendix K. A 129 summary ofthe recommendations to give the appearance that the river include: is still completely forested. Mitigation requirements for • Develop goal-oriented developments along waterways monitoring strategies and should include riparianbuffers as a indicators basic course ofaction. In addition, • Evaluate existing information trails or small openings in these gaps andestablish priorities corridorscan be made to permit river • Establish flexibleand access without reducing the buffers' comprehensive monitoring function. protocols • Establish collaborative Identify or create a regional land partnershipswith government trust to preserve and protect andprivate monitoring programs sensitive ecological habitats or at all levels historical properties. • Appoint an advisory group to A land trust is a non-profit integrate water quality organizationwhose primarypurpose monitoring programs and is the conservation and preservation effectivelyallocate resources of open space, park lands or natural • Improve data comparability areasfor public benefit. Although • Facilitate the accessibility, industrial landuse occupies validity, and usefulnessof significantportions ofthe study research data corridor, undeveloped areas do exist, • Improve assessment standards, especially along the upper interpretation, and analysis of Monongahela. Landtrusts withinthe data MonongahelaRiver corridor, such as • Routinely evaluate monitoring the Allegheny LandTrust, provide a activities through QA/QC vehicle for acquiring undeveloped methods. land with the goal ofmaintaining forestedviewsheds andconserving Encourage the preservation of the riparianzones along the river. A ecological and visual quality of the regional land trust would also afford river corridor by planting a the opportunity to preservesensitive vegetative barrier along the river's historic featuresand reuse them as edge where feasible. interpretiveareas. Although riparian buffersgenerally require 100 feetof wooded area to There is a LandTrust Grant Program work effectively, they provide through DCNR's Keystone aesthetic value as well. Therefore, Recreation, Parkand Conservation the areas that already have a riparian Fund that allows for 50% matching buffer should be maintained and fundsfor the acquisition and protected. New developments along managementofland trust projects. the river should consider the addition In order to receive thisgrant, a land of a smaller scale vegetative buffer trust organization must be prequalifiedthrough DCNR. To 130 prequalifyfor Keystone Funding, a Enforcedeficient municipalities to landtrust must fill out a establish compliance with existing prequalificationform; be tax exempt sewage treatment regulations by under section 501(c)(3) of the preparing and updating formal Internal Revenue Code of 1986; be Act 537 sewage facilitiesplans and registered with Bureau of Charitable prioritizing construction of sewage Organizations, PA Departmentof treatment facilitiesand/or sewer State; and be in existence for at least line extensions in unserviced areas. 5 consecutive years. Untreated and undertreated sewage effluentwas a growing concern Coordinate with local officialsand throughout the southernregions of private industry to enforce the study corridor. Manysmall stormwater management communities in these rural areas regulations and erosion control simply cannot affordthe methods. development andimplementation of Due to the urbancharacter of the these plans. However, the study corridor, water pollution via development of a treatmentplan is overland flowsis a significant the firststep towards regulatory concern. Sparselyvegetated, compliance. impervious landsadjacent to the river prohibit effectivefiltering of Funding is available through grants runoffpollutants. andreimbursements fromP ADEP. In addition, municipalities with One effectivesolution is the officialplans, as well as private conservation or reestablishment of landowners, may be eligible for riparian bufferzones. The benefits funds throughprograms such as the of riparianbuffers as filtersfor Pennsylvania Infrastructure surfacerunoff pollutants and Investment Authority (PITA) streambank stabilization is widely established by ACT 16. PIIA accepted'. In addition, riparian provides fundingfor community buffers enhance in-stream habitat by construction of new or upgraded providing cooler, shaded river water and sewer systems. margins and introducing detrital material as a source of organic E. Planning and Zoning nutrients. Coordinate with other River Conservation Plans within the vicinity. Coordination between river conservation planscan lead to increased support, fundingsources, and public awareness. Joining effortswith existing plansat Dunkard Creek, Brownsville, Youghiogheny River, Nine Mile

131 Run, andthe City of Pittsburgh can Reconnect zoning and planning. lead to more successful, common Due to the economic status of many goals. Any groups that complete corridorcommunities, zoning and River ConservationPlans along the planning oftendo not work in study corridorin the futureshould concert as they should. Zoning also be included. ordinances arefrequently changed to accommodate developers and Work with municipalities to businesses which conflict with promote more aggressive published futureland use plans. This enforcementof zoning. patternhas leftmany municipalities Only with a well-administered with zoning ordinances which do not zoning enforcementprogram can a consider futureregional plansor zoning ordinanceperform efficiently. trends. Zoning andplanning are Strong enforcement procedures will closely related topics and should be obtain an optimum in compliance, developed and amended in the true objective of the ordinance, conjunction. New developments while minimizingmoney spent on within the study corridor should law suits, or pursuing violators adhere to a municipality's futureland (PennsylvaniaDepartment of use plan, or to the futureland use Community andEconomic plan of the appropriate county. Development, 1995). Have municipalities that do not With the proper enforcementof a adopt zoning develop an Official well-preparedzoning ordinance, Map. steep slopes, wetlandsand For communities that do not wish to floodplains can be protected as green implement zoning, an official map space, commercial and residential can be used as a basis to designate developments can be accommodated, land forfuture public use, but with andabandoned or underused less enforceablepower than a zoning industrial sites can be revitalized. ordinance. Municipalities wishing to adopt anofficial map should follow Use zoning regulations to restrict the guidelines prescribed in Article building in floodplains. IV of the Pennsylvania Zoning regulations are a tool by Municipalities Planning Code. which municipalities along the river Developing an officialmap as a land can control the improper use technique can enhance planning development of floodplains. by aiding local municipalities in Although development may take highlighting development place in floodplains, it is important opportunities, planningfor the to set guidelines in harmonywith overall use of the riverfront,planning FEMA and the ACOE forsensible forthe land acquisitions, and development. identifyingsignificant cultural and environmental resources for enhancements. Due to the intent of the riverfrontoverlay district, there 132 would be little liability and avoiding steep slopes, prime enforcementissues normally agricultural soils, floodplains, slide associated with typical zoning. prone areas, and watercourses. The overlay district concept should be Develop Multi-Municipal applied to the standardsof the Comprehensive Plans forriver primary zoning district ofthe communities. municipality. Communities that do Comprehensive plans provide an not have zoning may wish to informationbase that can be used as consider adopting the special overlay a tool for guiding future district standardsas partof ail development and land use. Relevant Official Map. issues such as housing, land use, economic development, community F. Recreation facilitiesand services, transportation Develop a cooperative process with andrecreational amenities are the Port of Pittsburgh to address typically reviewed to formulate potential conflicts and safety issues futureplans. Multi-municipal between commercial shipping and comprehensive plans lay the recreation interests. groundwork forregional Establish a cooperative process development strategies. In recent detailing how conflictswill be years, the Pennsylvania Department addressed between recreational and of Communityand Economic commercial development interests. Development has actively supported Acknowledging the importance of regional comprehensive plans which both recreational and commercial combine multi-municipal resources. development interests andresolving conflictsthat arise is necessaryin Create a Special Overlay District order to take fulladvantage of for municipalities along the river. opportunities along the river. SIHC Municipalities with zoning and the Port ofPittsburgh should ordinances should consider creating jointly establish procedures to a river front recreation overlay address these issues. district to rethink land use along the river. Several municipalities lack For example, the Port ofPittsburgh recreational access to the river as should be involved early in the well as zoning that would permit this Rivers of Steel landing site planning type of land use. The overlay process to help identifyand resolve district's intent should be to potential issues. encourage economic development and the conservation and Other examples relatedto river preservation of historic, natural, and safetymay include the addition ofno recreational resources. An overlay wake zones or speed limit district would allow river-related restrictions forboth recreational and economic development to occur on commercial users ofthe river. land that has the physical features that can support development, 133 use the parkas a resting area, picnic Foster partnerships and area,or interpretive stop. agreements with private marinas to provide Rivers of Steel tour boat Ensure the continued operation of access. the Fredericktown Ferry by Public access ramps do not provide a improving the operation, docking areafor large tour boats. maintenance and equipment. The majority of the facilitiesable to This is the last cable drawn operating house a tour boat along the ferry in the easternUnited States. Its Monongahela River are private place in history as a unique formof marinas. McKee's Point Park, transportationcould be added into Greene Cove Yacht Club, the Beach the Rivers of Steel tours by utilizing Club Marinaand the Two Rivers it as an interpretive stop or by Marina along with several others landingat the proposed Luzerne could provide such a service. Township Boat Ramp and ferrying the tourists to the Fredericktown side Develop and maintain proposed of the river. According to the Port of recreational facilitiesalong the Pittsburgh, funding forthe reuse and river. establishment of old ferry sites is Numerous proposals exist fornew available through the Inter-Modal recreational facilitiesalong the river, SurfaceTransportation Efficiency including the Charleroi Promenade Act (IS TEA). The Port of Pittsburgh andTower, the new Pechins marina indicated a willingness to assist in in Fredericktown, McKee's Point acquiring these fundsfor use at ferry Park,McKeesport Master Site Plan sites. fora Linear Park,Luzerne Township boat dock, Donora riverfrontpark & Foster the relationship between boat ramp, Monessen boat ramp, Rivers of Steel Heritage Area and Nine Mile Run Project, Brownsville the National Road Heritage Park Marina, Brownsville wharf,and at Brownsville. Sandcastle boat ramp. Completing This would link two heritage area and maintaining these projects will initiatives and encourage crossover greatly enhancepublic access to the travel between visitors to each. river and its shoreline. Possibilities here might include covered wagon tours of the former Renovate and maintain the National Road route or tours of the Glassport Community Park. historic bridges along the National This park was built and completed in Road. It may even be possible to 1986 with the cooperation of the connect the two heritage areas as Twin Rivers Council of Government. they were historically traveled by Shortly after, the area was severely pioneers. This could be vandalizedand is no long open to the accomplished by a tour of the public. Renovating this property for National Road route ending in its intended use would also allow for Brownsville (known as Redstone Old the Steel Industry Heritage Trail to Fort during the period of 134 construction of the National Road), The criteria forthis designation are then boardinga boat designed to currentlybeing reevaluated by resemble an early 1800s craftfor a DCNR and at the time of contact the tour down the Monongahela River. department will present the new A trip of this sort would allow criteria. visitors to see one of the main routes of westernmigration in the early Develop and maintain new public United States and, in some cases, to boat ramps in West Homestead, retrace the steps of their ancestors Clairton, Masontown, and who traveled this route. Greensboro that comply with safety and accessibility standards. Partner with the PFBC Water Too fewboat launches arecurrently Trails Initiative. This program available within the study corridor. includes creating a state wide By building additional accesses, network of water trails to enhance more boaters will have the the recreational experiences of the opportunity to use the river, andhave region while attracting tourism. The shorter drive times to those accesses. Rivers of Steel Tours will be eligible These communities were chosen for additional funding, while inviting based upon location along the river, tourism into the area through state proximity to an existing ramp, and wide promotion of the program. The population numbers. The PFBC Water Trails Initiative can provide provide for a grant specifically funding forsi gnage, mapping and focusedon boat ramps. Thisgrant other associated tasks. This is a new provides forthe investigation, program which will allow forthe creation, andconstruction of the adaptation of the program to fitthe ramps. Most ramps arethen turned needs of the grantee. over to the municipalities forservice and maintenance. Participate in the nomination of the Monongahela River as a Emphasize water quality ModifiedRecreational River on improvements consistent with the Pennsylvania Scenic Rivers sportfishingprograms such as the Inventory. PFBC's "Pittsburgh Pool" Hybrid This designation provides for the Striped Bass Management protection andconservation of river Program. resources, as well as potential Effortstoward improving water funding forprojects. The proposed quality have helped the designation of the Monongahela Monongahela's sport fishery Riveras a ModifiedRecreational rebound. In addition to managing Riveron the Pennsylvania Scenic naturally reproducing populations of Rivers Inventory requires a non­ warm water fishes,PFBC manages profitorganization to nominate the stocking plans forwalleye, tiger river forthis designation afterthe muskellunge, and hybrid striped bass Rivers Conservation Plan is throughout the river. As a key completed and approved by DCNR. interest river conservation, SIHC is 135

. �--·-···-···-···---·-1 . . . ·-···-···- ··-· . L-· · ·1. BUTLER Figure 1 MONONGAHELA RIVER CONSERVATION PLAN PROJECT AREA WITHIN WATERSHED BEAVER .. .• / .. r···-···-···-···-···-··· ARMSTRONG •/ I. . /. ... . •. .. I • .,· INDIANA . ALLEGHENY . .. I I.

. /:�,,!j •. '-···-·-...... • J •,.._. ••• .• WASHINGTON ..., ..,

SOMERSET

,.... .-I � ..... 0

.-I '-J.. L.. < ...,u .,.,.. 0 ...L

APPENDIXB: Population and Economic Characteristics Appendix B Population and Economic Characteristics

1990 POPULATION AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS

POPULATION DISTRIBUTION ECONOMIC STATISTICS Percent of Population Percent of Percent of Percent of Percent of Median Household Below Population Total Population Population <18 Population 18 - 64 Population 64 + Income Poverty Level Unemployed

Westmoreland Cou,1ty 370,321 22.4 60.5 17.l 25,736 II.I 7.1 NorthBelle VernonBorough 2,084 18.6 53.3 28.1 19,957 7.9 13.4 Rostraver Township 11,224 22.5 61.5 15.8 25,615 10.8 I1.8 Monessen City of 9,806 17.1 53.I 29.8 18,131 18.3 17.5 AVERAGE OF RIVER COMMUNITIES 23,114 19.8 57.2 23.0 NIA 13.7 14.0

Percent of Population Percent of Percent of Percent of Percent of Median Household Below Population Total Population Population <18 Population 18 - 64 Population 64 + Income Poverty Level Unemployed

Allegheny County 1,336,449 21.l 61.5 17.4 28,136 11.5 6.3 Forward Township 3,871 20.0 62.6 17.4 29,II5 I0.7 5.7 Elizabeth Borough 1,595 19.3 55.7 25.0 21,888 13.7 5.7 Elizabeth Township 14,694 22.0 61.3 16.6 30,542 8.1 7.2 West Elizabeth Borough 649 22.6 59.5 18.0 24,375 15.7 10.6 ClairtonCity of 9,656 21.3 55.7 23.0 17,396 22.3 12.1 Lincoln Borough 1,187 20.9 61.7 17.4 26,950 9.0 8.8 West Mifflin Borough 23,644 20.0 60.1 19.9 26,867 10.0 7.4 Glassport Borough 5,582 20.2 57.6 22.2 20,146 15.9 10.3 JeffersonBorough 9,533 22.8 63.0 14.4 34,548 5.5 4.8 Dravosburg Borough 2,377 18.6 60.4 23.0 22,886 7.9 7.6 McKeesport City of 26,016 22.4 54.4 23.2 16,427 24.2 13.7 Port View Borough 4,641 20.0 59.0 21.0 24,976 9.5 11.0 Duquesne City of 8,525 24.5 52.7 22.8 15,801 25.5 14.7 North Versailles Township 12,308 20.3 61.3 18.5 25,130 9.1 7.1 East Pittsburgh Borough 2,160 21.0 56.6 22.4 16,150 21.8 I1.7 Braddock Borough 4,682 22.9 55.4 21.7 17,340 20.6 12.1 NorthBraddock Borough 7,036 22.2 57.6 20.2 18,550 21.3 9.9 Rankin Borough 2,503 29.0 50.4 20.6 10,872 40.7 14.6 Whitaker Borough 1,416 19.8 58.5 21.6 32,571 I0.4 7.2 Munhall Borough 13,158 19.3 56.2 24.4 32,883 6.4 5.7 Homestead Borough 4,179 21.1 55.5 23.4 11,390 31.6 11.3 Swissvale Borough 10,637 18.1 61.7 20.6 23,773 12.5 6.6 West Homestead 2,493 16.4 62.7 20.9 22,298 16.8 8.0 Pittsburgh City of 369,879 19.8 62.2 17.9 20,747 21.4 9.1 AVERAGE OF RIVER COMMUNITIES 542,421 20.3 60.7 19.0 N/A 18.7 9.6

Source: 1990 US Census

APPENDIX C: Municipal Population 1980-2015 MUNICIPAL POPULATION 1980-2015

1980 1990 2015 Greene County 40,476 39,550 NIA Dunkard Township 2,647 2,386 NIA Monongahela Township 1,920 1,858 NIA Greensboro Borough 377 332 NIA Cumberland Township 7,053 6,742 NIA Rices Landing Borough 516 464 NIA JeffersonTownship 2,671 2,536 NIA Total of River Communities 15,184 14,318 NIA

1980 1990 2015 Fayette County 159,417 145,351 159,559 Springhill Township 2,906 2,800 2,834 Point Marion Borough 1,642 1,344 1,453 Nicholson Township 2,143 1,995 2,110 German Township 5,900 5,596 5,909 Masontown Borough 4,909 3,759 4,020 LuzerneTownship 5,549 4,904 4,666 Borwnsville Borough 4,043 3,164 3,385 BorwnsvilleTownship 936 847 823 JeffersonTownship 2,265 2,047 1,968 Newell Borough 629 518 496 Washington Township 5,069 4,613 5,523 Fayette City Borough 788 713 784 Belle VernonBorough 1,489 1,213 1,307 Total of River Communities 38,268 33,513 35,278

1980 1990 2015 Washington County 217,074 204,584 228,837 East Bethlehem Township 3,353 2,799 2,712 Centerville Borough 4,207 3,842 3,695 West Brownsville Borough 1,433 1,170 1,139 CaliforniaBorough 5,703 5,748 6,129 Coal Center Borough 255 184 182 Elco Borough 417 373 365 Roscoe Borough 1,123 872 821 Allenport Borough 735 595 595 Stockdale Borough 641 630 627 Dunlevy Borough 463 417 421 Speers Borough 1,425 1,284 1,346 Charleroi Borough 5,717 5,014 5,327 North Charleroi Borough 1,760 1,562 1,669 Fallowfield Township 5,439 4,972 5,249 Carrol Township 6,590 6,210 6,913 Donora Borough 7,524 5,928 5,744 Monongahela City of 5,950 4,928 4,792 New Eagle Borough 2,617 2,172 2,283 Union Township 6,692 6,322 8,511 Total of River Communities 62,044 55,022 58,520

APPENDIX D: Hazardous and Toxic Waste Site Data SUMMARYOF FEDERAL LEGISLATION (Adapted fromPercival, 1996)

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Cleanup, and LiabilityAct of 1980 (CERCLA), 42 u.s.c. §§9601-9657 CERCLA establishes a strict liability system forreleases of hazardous substances and creates a "Superfund" to finance actions to cleanupsuch releases. Amended by the SuperfundAmendments and Reauthorization Act of 1996, which increases the size of Superfund, imposes numerical goals and deadlines forcleanup of Superfundsites, and specifiesstandards and procedures to be followedin determining the level and scope of cleanupactions.

Resource Conservation and RecoveryAct of 1976 (RCRA) 42 U.S.C. §§6901-6987 RCRA directs the EPA to establish regulations ensuring the safemanagement of hazardous waste fromcradle to grave. Reauthorized and substantially amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSW A), which impose new technology-based standards on landfillshandling hazardous wastes, require phaseout of landdisposal forcertain untreated hazardous wastes, and increase federalauthority over disposal of nonhazardous solid wastes.

Toxic SubstancesControl Act of 1976 (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. §§2601-2629 TSCA provides the EPA with comprehensive authority to regulate or prohibit the manufacture,distribution, or use of chemical substancesthat pose unreasonable risks; requires premanufacturenotification of EPA for new chemicals or significantnew uses of existing chemicals. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION QUERYRESULTS

HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE SITE INVENTORY

Army Corps of Engineers Lower Monongahela River Navigation Feasibility Study Final Main Report (1991) U.S. Army Engineer District Location Facility (RiverMile) Site Description

Westinghouse Electric Corp. Bulk liquid storage area. 11.5 PAD987270907 Leakage. Hazardous waste generator. Potential ground/surface water, soil contamination. lncative. Waste tanks removed. Westinghouse Air Brake Division Small hazardous waste generator. Drums, tanks. 12 Closure activities ongoing. Leakage in PAD004341269 soil/groundwater. Caustic waters. Xylene, waste paints, coolants. USX Taylor Landfill 12.5 PAD000739672 Inactive landfilldisposal area. Hazardous waste present: benzene, phenols, etc. West MifflinSanitary Authority 12.5 PAD980693147 No information. USX Corp. National Works Inactive. Drums, tanks, bins. solid waste, 15 PAD000731505 transformers, PCB's, lead, asbestos, etc. Remedial cleanup. USX Corp. Irvin Works 18.5 PAD004379061 Slag. Active site. Drums, diked areas, tanks, spent pickle liquors. CarnegieNatural Gas-Pipeline 11 18.8 Coke oven residue burial. Active. Unlined pits, trenches. Chromium, lead, mercury. Potential fordirect contact exists. USX Corp. Clairton Works 20.5 Sludge/decanter fromcoking operations. Not PAD004498010 I hazardous now. Kutsenkow Landfill 20.5 PAD980830939 Dump site. Pikcling acids, aromatic solvents, polyaromatic hydrocarbons. Peters Creek Lagoon 21 PAD981034788 Inactive. PADEP medium priority. Acids, f organics, phenols. Monitoring wells installed. Ben Construction Company 21 PAD008938474 No hazardous waste. Roadway fillmaterial. I , Tree stumps. Hercules-Picco 23.6 Manufacturingoperation. Landfill resins, sludge, hazardous waste. ! i Storage area. Groundwater collection and Ashland Oil i 24 treatmentsystem Elrama School Inactive hazardous waste site. Potential for 25.5 PAD9810344994 ground/surface water and soil contamination. Acid clays, solvents. ElramaWorks Town Gas 25.5 PAD980706915 Inactive. Covered by development. No wastes existing since 1935. Coal gasificationproducts Grief Brothers Cooperage Corp. No potential hazard or on-site disposal since 30.3 PAD063770200 1971. PADEP low priority. Pickle liquor acid wastes.

Source: Lower Monongahela River Navigation System Feasibility Study Final Main Report by ACOE, 1991, Pittsburgh: U.S. Army Engineer District, Corps of Engineers. Putnaks Packing I 31.5 Active non-hazardous waste site. Meat PAD063770200 I processing. Inactive site. PADEP low priority site. StaufferChemical Company Hazardous waste generator. Solid, liquids. 31.5 PAD004325692 3acre site. Potential forground/surface water and soil contamination. BurrellConstruction and Supply 34.6 Asphalt paving material, slag, small hazardous PAD004347894 material usage (lO0gal/yr) CanastralesLandfill 38.9 PAD98050847 No information. 41.5 Active waste site. Collection pond. Pigments, Welch's LandfillDisposal alum mud, waste dyes. 95 acres. CorningGlass Works Charleroi Hazardous waste generator. Liquid wastes 41.6 (lO00gal/yr), soild waste (200tons/yr). Stored in PAD004326542 containers.

Source: Lower Monongahela River Navigation System Feasibility Study Final Main Report by ACOE, 1991, Pittsburgh: U.S. Army Engineer District, Corps of Engineers. APPENDIXE: Water Quality Data NPDES PERMITTED FACILITIES

WATER CHEMISTRY DATA

National Water Quality Assessment Program (1997) United States Department of the Interior-Geological Survey

WATER CHEMISTRY DATA

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection STORET System (1997) Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

RETRliEVAL PROGRAM

PGM•INVENT THIS IS AN INVENTORY RETRIEVAL SHOWING SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR ALL PARAMETERS

A BEGINNING DATE OF (YY/MM/DD) 96/06/01 WAS REQUESTED NO ENDING DATE WAS REQUESTED -- STORET ASSUMED THE ENDING DATE WAS THAT OF THE MOST RECENT DATA VALUE FOUND

STATION SELECTION WAS BY:

AGENCY CODE(S) AND STATION NUMBER(S) FOR THE FOLLOWING AGENCY(S): 21PA

'STATIONS SELECTED WERE RESTRICTED TO:

AGENCIES WHOSE DATA HAS NOT BEEN 'RETIRED'

,CONTACTS FOR AGENCY CODES RETRIEVED:

AGENCY PRIMARY CONTACT NAME ORGANIZATION PHONE NUMBER(S)

21PA SCHREFFLER, TAMMY PENNSYLVANIA DPT ENV PROT (717)783-3638

'DATA RESTRICTIONS:

**NOTE** NO DEPTH INDICATOR RESTRICTIONS WERE SPECIFIED - COMPUTATIONS WILL BE PERFORMED WITHOUT REGARD TO DEPTH INDICATORS

**NOTE'** NO GRAB/COMPOSITE RESTRICTIONS WERE UTILIZED, SO BOTH GRAB AND COMPOSITE SAMPLE TYPES MAY HAVE BEEN INCLUDED - COMPUTATIONS WILL BE PERFORMED WITHOUT REGARD TO SAMPLE TYPE

**NOTE** NO COMPOSITE SAMPLE RESTRICTIONS WERE SPECIFIED - COMPUTATIONS WILL INCLUDE STATISTICAL FEATURES OF THE COMPOSITING PROCESS, PRODUCING VALID RESULTS ONLY WHEN SOPHISTICATED COMPOSITES ARE NOT ENCOUNTERED. SPECIFY COMPOSITE HANDLING KEYWORDS "ANC" AND/OR "DSROC" IF NEEDED

***** END OF SUMMARY SECTION ***** :TORET RE'IRIEVAL DATE 97/09/25 PGM•ALLPARH PAGE: l WQN070l 03085000 PFBC8-003 40 24 19.0 079 52 53.0 l MONONGAHELA RVR-RJINltIN BR OFF SR837 LOCK/DAM 2 42003 PENNSYLVANIA ALLEGHENY OHIO RIVER 050100 (T'lPA/JIHBNT/STREAM/BIO MONONGAHELA RIVER 2lPA 770419 05020005001 0009.250 ON 0000 FEET DEPTH

------INITIAL DATE 96/01/29 96/02/27 96/03/12 96/04/18 96/05/16 96/06/24 96/07/23 96/08/21 96/09/23 INITIAL TIME 1230 1220 0940 0940 1125 1330 0950 0950 0930 MEDIUM WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER 00010 WATER TEMP CENT 4.0 12.0 6.l 11.9 14.5 21.5 26.7 17.6 00011 WATER TEMP FAHN 39.2$ 53.6$ 43.0$ 53.4$ 58.1$ 70.7$ 80.1$ 63.7$ 00095 CNDUCTVY AT 25C MICROMHO 229 266 330 305 211 383 187 249 238 00300 DO MG/L 12.4 10.6 9.6 8.6 8.0 7.2 6.2 7.8 00301 DO SATUR PERCENT 94. 7$ 98.1$ 76.8$ 79.6$ 76.9$ 80.0$ 76.5$ 82 .1$ 00400 PH SU 6.62 6.90 6.64 6.52 6.77 7.01 6.94 7.94 00403 PH LAB SU 6.7 6.5 6.7 6.5 6.4 7.5 6.4 6.5 6.4 00410 TALK CAC03 MG/L 20 26 26 34 26 44 28 30 30 00515 RESIDUE DISS-105 C MG/L 186 180 2K 248 180 320 186 332 190 00530 RESIDUE TOT NFLT MG/L 2K 9 22 10 30 366 76 8 28 00556 OIL-GRSE FREON-GR MG/L 5.00K 5.00K 5.00K 5.70 5.00K 5.00K 5. OOK 5.00K 5.00K 00610 NH3+NH4- N TOTAL MG/L .110 .190 .120 .130 .060 .070 .040 .040 .070 00612 UN-IONZD NH3-N MG/L .00005$ .0003$ .00007$ .00009$ .00009$ .0002$ .0002$ .002$ 00615 N02-N TOTAL MG/L .006 .010 .012 .018 .010 .022 .012 .012 .Ol6 00619 UN-IONZD NH3-NH3 MG/L .00006$ .0004$ .00009$ .0001$ .0001$ .0002$ .0003$ .002$ 00620 N03-N TOTAL MG/L l.090 .970 .910 .640 .610 .990 .650 .650 .730 00665 PHOS-TOT MG/L P .060 .040 .040 .040 .030 .320 .080 .100 .060 00680 T ORG C C MG/L 2.1 1.6 2.0 2.2 4.9 3.3 4.4 2.8 3.0 00719 CN FREE HBG METH µG/L l.OOOK l.OOOK l.OOOK l.OOOK l.OOOK 1. OOOK l.OOOK l.OOOK l.OOOK 00720 CYANIDE CN-TOT MG/L .001 .001 .003 .004 .OOlK .004 .002 .001 .003 00900 TOT HARD CAC03 MG/L 68 94 108 100 86 98 57 83 72 00945 SULFATE S04-TOT MG/L 56 71 69 70 58 113 42 66 56 00951 FLUORIDE F,TOTAL MG/L .20K .20K .20K .20K .20K .20K .20K .20K .20K 01042 COPPER CU,TOT UG/L lOK lOK lOK ll lOK 24 lOK 35 lOK 01045 IRON FE1 TOT UG/L 2770 1440 1500 717 1840 16300 5900 6750 4140 01051 LEAD PB,TOT UG/L 3 2 2 lK 3 18 6 8 5 �s MANGNE�E MN UG/L 277.0 241.0 198.0 244.0 139.0 576.0 240.0 391.0 190.0 01067 NICKEL NI,TOTAL UG/L 25K 25K 25K 39 25K 25K 29 25K 25K 01092 ZINC ZN,TOT UG/L 42 28 40 29 SOK 106 45 97 68 01105 ALUMINUM AL,TOT UG/L 2180 773 1100 437 1620 8640 5950 3970 1850 32730 PHENOLS TOTAL UG/L 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 74041 WQF SAMPLE UPDATED 960415 960613 960613 960820 960911 960911 970106 970107 970107 STORBT RETRIEVAL DATE 97/09/25 PGM•ALLPARM PAGE: 2 WQN0701 03085000 PPBC8-003 40 24 19.0 079 52 53.0 1 l'«JlllONGAHEL RVR-RAHKIN BR OPP SR837 LOCK/DAM 2 42003 ALLBGHBNY OHIO RIVER 050100 /TYPA/AMB!IT / STREAM/BIO M0BORGAHBLA RIVER 21PA 770419 05020005001 0009.250 ON 0000 FEET DEPTH

------INITIAL DATE 96/10/17 96/11/18 96/12/10 97/01/22 97/02/18 97/03/19 97/04/23 INITIAL TIME 1000 0940 0940 0930 1300 0900 0930 MEDIUM WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER 00010 WATER TEMP CENT 17.5 8.6 4.8 4.7 8.4 9.7 14.. 4 00011 WATER TEMP FAIIN 63.5$ 47.5$ 40.6$ 40.5$ 47.1$ 49.5$ 57.9$ 00095 CNDUCTVY AT 25C MICROMHO 393 260 239 369 371 237 390 00300 DO r«;/L 9.0 11.6 12.0 12.0 9.8 12.0 9.2 00301 DO SATUR PERCENT 92.8$ 100.0$ 93.8$ 93.8$ 82.4$ 106.2$ 88.5$ 00400 PH SU 7.32 7.23 7.16 7.30 7.14 7.47 7.49 00403 PH LAB SU 7.0 6.9 6.8 6.7 6.7 6.8 6.7 00410 T ALIC CAC03 MG/L 44 34 32 38 42 32 40 00515 RESIDUE DISS-105 C MG/L 285 190 162 240 260 166 272 00530 RESIDUE TOT NFLT MG/L 86 22 12 4 18 14 28 00556 OIL-GRSE FREON-GR MG/L 5.00K 5.00K 5.00K 5.00K 5.00K 5.00K 6.20 00610 NH3+NH4- N TOTAL MG/L .050 .080 .100 .200 .120 .090 .080 00612 UN-IONZD NH3-N MG/L .0003$ .0002$ .0002$ .0005$ .0003$ .0005$ .0006$ 00615 N02-N TOTAL MG/L .016 .010 .008 .020 .010 .020 .020 00619 UN-IONZD NH3-NH3 MG/L .0004$ .0003$ .0002$ .0006$ .0003$ .0006$ .0008$ 00620 N03-N TOTAL MG/L .840 .850 .700 .770 .760 .710 .840 00665 PHOS-TOT MG/L P .090 .020 .020K .020K .020 .020 .040 00680 T ORG C C MG/L 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.5 00719 CN FREE HBG METH OG/L 1.000 l.OOOK l.OOOK l.OOOK l.OOOK l.OOOK 1.000 00720 CYANIDE CN-TOT MG/L .004 .003 .001 .004 .001 .003 .001 00900 TOT HARD CAC03 MG/L 94 90 68 123 57 76 108 00945 SULFATE S04-TOT MG/L 104 59 40 118 82 60 117 00951 FLUORIDE F,TOTAL MG/L .20K .20K .20K .20K .20K .20K .20K 01042 COPPER CU,TOT OG/L 15 lOK lOK lOK lOK lOK lOK 01045 IRON FE,TOT UG/L 6050 1350 1010 1040 960 1080 1720 01051 LEAD PB,TOT OG/L 6 2 l 3 lK lK 2 01055 MANGNESE MN OG/L 345.0 170.0 132.0 227.0 175.0 153.0 226.0 01067 NICKEL NI,TOTAL OG/L 25K 25K 25K 25K 25K 25K 25K 01092 ZINC ZN,TOT UG/L 46 23 22 26 41 18 41 01105 ALUMINUM AL,TOT UG/L 3000 820 706 360 367 751 890 32730 PHENOLS TOTAL UG/L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 74041 WQF SAMPLE UPDATED 970107 970228 970306 970519 970520 970520 970722 THAT'S ALL FOLKS ...... ···························································································································· ...... • * .. .. * * ...... * ...... ** . * . * * . . * * * * . . * . . . . . • * . * * • • ...... * * . * * ...... * . ** .. . * .. • . * . * * * ...... * . . . . * . * * * * * ...... * ...... • * * * . * ...... * ...... * **** STORET SUMQRY SECTION •••• • .. . * ...... FOLLOWING IS A RETRIEVAL OP DATA FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S STORET SYSTEM, ...... A DATABASE OP SAMPLING SITES JINI) THEIR ASSOCIATED QUALITY DATA. THE INFORMATION WAS ...... * RETRIEVED USING SPECIFIC STORET INSTRUCTION SETS IN COMBINATION TO SELECT ONLY THE DATA . .. •• • • • REQUESTED FOR THIS RETRIEVAL. BRIEF EXPLANATIONS OP THE INSTRUCTION SETS ARE INCLUDED BELOW. .. .. QUESTIONS MAY BE DIRECTED TO THE STORET USER ASSISTANCE SECTION AT . . . ** * ( 800) 424-9067. .. * . .. .. * ...... * .. * ** ... * * * * ** .... * * * * ** * * * * * * * ** ...... ** ** ** ...... FOLLOWING IS THE FORMAT FOR THE STATION HEADER INFORMATION WHICH APPEARS ...... ** ** ON EACH PAGE OP THE RETRIEVAL UNLESS STATION AGGREGATION WAS PERFORMED .. * ** ...... * * ** ** ...... ** .. STATION NUMBER(S) .. * ** LATITUDE/LONGITUDE PRECISION CODE .. * * ** STATION LOCATION * * STATE/COONTY CODE STATE NAME COUNTY NAME * ** MAJOR BASIN NAME MAJ/MIN/SUB BASIN CODE * ...... * MINOR BASIN NAME * ** ** *STATION TYPE AGENCY CODE STORED DATE HYDROLOGIC UNIT* * ** * ... *** STATION DEPTH ELEVATION *** ** ECOREGION * ** WATER BODY ...... AQUIFERS ...... ** LOCKED DATE ...... ** *RIVER MILE INDEX ...... * * ...... * .. .. ** * .. ** ** * * .... ** ** .... CONTINUED------ON NEXT PAGE(Sl ...... - ...... RETRIEVAL PROGRAM

PGM•ALLPJIRM TRIS PR0GR»1 PRINTS AcrtDU. SAMPLEVALUES FOR ALL PARAMETERS

110 BBGINHil'IG DATE WAS REQtJBSTEO -- STORET ASStJMBD THE BBGIRNING DATE WAS THAT OP THE OLDEST DATA VALUE POCND !10 ERDING DATE WAS REQtJBSTEO -- STORET ASSUMED THE ERDING DATE WAS THAT OP THE MOST RECENT DATA VALtJB POCND

TATION SELECTION WAS BY:

LATITODB/LONGITODB COORDINATES OR AREA stlRROtJNDING A SPBCIPIED COORDINATE

STATIONS SELECTED WERE RESTRICTED TO:

STATION TYPB(SJ AND/OR SPECIFIC PAMMBTBR COVBIU\GB AGENCIES WHOSE DATA HAS NOT BEEN 'RETIRED'

.:oNTACTS FOR AGENCY CODES RETRIEVED:

AGENCY PRIMARY CONTACT NAME ORGANIZATION !?HONE NOMBER(S)

ll2WRD WILLIAMS, OWEN US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (703)648-5610

-DATA SPECIFICATIONS:

**NOTE•• NO REMARK CODE RESTRICTIONS WERE SPECIFIED - COMPUTATIONS WILL BE PERFORMED WITHOUT REGARD TO DATA REMARKS

'DATA RESTRICTIONS:

**NOTE** NO DEPTH INDICATOR RESTRICTIONS WERE SPECIFIED - COMPUTATIONS WILL BE PERFORMED WITHOUT REGARD TO DEPTH INDICATORS

**NOTE** NO GRAB/COMPOSITE RESTRICTIONS WERE UTILIZED, SO BOTH GRAB AND COMPOSITE SAMPLE TYPES MAY HAVE BEEN INCLUDED - COMPUTATIONS WILL BE PERFORMED WITHOUT REGARD TO SAMPLE TYPE

**NOTE•• NO COMPOSITE SAMPLE RESTRICTIONS WERE SPECIFIED - COMPUTATIONS WILL INCLUDE STATISTICAL FEATURES OF THE COMPOSITING PROCESS, PRODUCING VALID RESULTS ONLY WHEN SOPHISTICATED COMPOSITES ARE NOT ENCOUNTERED. SPECIFY COMPOSITE HANDLING KEYWORDS "ANC" AND/OR "DSROC" IF NEEDED

***** END OF SUMMARY SECTION *****

Pennsylvania Department Of Conservation and Natural Resources �' ---Rachel Carson State OfficeBuilding n P.O. Box 8552 Dt Harrisburg, pA.A1:;,1n_�'l'JZ5·S2. July 8, 1998 "lWl t, "' ii:'Nt,':;,Eu?�G COMPANY (),,-, PRO�L'J ,�,,- I f,,u. . _ ' ...... --- '\ , ' 71" \-us\/Ol J :;_; -, Bureau of Forestry . i�;· �� � 717-787-3444 � �-; �� .C::!i(f..i�1 J � F-11Y 717-783-5109 ,-,<':V\ . David A Zimsky / \J rz;rf..op-. �- -,-...a���-J -- p· � --0-;-� -R}·_ H Mackin EngineeringCompany -� � �/ R.I.D.C. ParkWest 0 ,Ccrre�;'�----C·-·� --, D;. ·--- . ,::· . _, r1. , •.•. n. r:,e 117 IndustryDrive � �'-nt:rJcf fi1 ;.tJ; p , ,:i�tg. File Pittsburgh, PA 15275-1015 Ll::t"Enc!o:;���0 1998 I:? �NII-...... _.,__,'-tl)CCeeap1t. ___ Re: PNDI Review Request forSpecies of Special ConcernReported to Occur in lower Monogahela River watershed PER number: 006674

DearMr. Zimsky:

In response to your data request of November 4, 1997, I have enclosed a printout listing all species of special concerntracked by the PNDI programreported to occur in or near the above area. Please contact our office if any land disturbance is planned forthis site.

From left to right, the columns are as follows: scientific name, common name, global element rank, state element rank, state protection status, Pennsylvania Biological Survey suggested protection status, federal protection status, date last observed. Handouts explaining element ranks and protection statuses have been included in order to decipher the printout. If you have any further questions or problems feelfree to contact me at the above number, and please refer to the P.E.R. Reference Number in future correspondence related to this project.

PNDI is a site specific information system that describes significantnatural resources of Pennsylvania. This system includes data descriptive of plant and animal species of special concern, exemplary naturalcommu nities and unique geological features. PNDI is a cooperative project of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, The Nature Conservancy and the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy. This response represents the most up-to-date summary of the PNDI data files and is good for one year. An absence of recorded information does not necessarily imply actual conditions on-site. A field survey of any site may reveal previously unreported populations. Please reference the PER Number listed above in any further correspondence concerning this response or the PNDI system.

Sincerely, � lv1 - ldwit�V)� Julia Letnaunchyn Plant Program Intern

stsw:ardsiiip s.ar1ica

An EQuat opportunltv/AfflrmatrveAction emc10ver Printea on �ecvciea Pacer PNDI TRACKED SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE LOWER MONOGAHELA RIVER D4 JUN 1998 SCIENTIFIC NAME •••••••••••••••••••• COMMON NAME•••••••••••••••••••••••• GRANIC•••• SRANIC•••••• PA •••• PBS ••• us...... LASTOBS •••

: ACALYPHA DEAMII THREE-SEEDED MERCURY G? SX N PX 1990-09-22 ACONITUM UNCINATUM BLUE MONKSHOOD G4 S2 PT PT 1988-07-14 ' AMELANCHIER HUMILIS LOW SERVICEBERRY GS S1 TU PE 1921-04-28 ARISTOLOCHIA MACROPHYLLA PIPEVINE G5 S4 TU DL 1974-07-17 ARISTOLOCHIA MACROPHYLLA PIPEVINE G5 S4 TU DL 1991-09-07 ARISTOLOCHIA MACROPHYLLA PIPEVINE GS S4 TU DL 1992-06-01 ASTRAGALUS CANADENSIS CANADIAN MILICVETCH G5 S2 N TU 1901-07-09 CAREX BUXBAUMII BROWN SEDGE GS S3 TU PR 1890-0S-30 CASSIA MARILANDICA WILD SENNA GS SU TU TU 1917-08-10 CASSIA MARILANDICA WILD SENNA G5 SU TU TU 1908-10-0S CASSIA MARILANDICA WILD SENNA GS SU TU TU 1907-08-03 CAVE, SANDSTONE FRACTURE CAVE, SANDSTONE FRACTURE G? S? CAVE, SANDSTONE FRACTURE CAVE, SANDSTONE FRACTURE G? S? COLLINSIA VERNA SPRING BLUE-EYED MARY GS S3 PR PR 1942-0S-02 DELPHINIUM EXALTATUM TALL LARKSPUR G3 S1 PE PE 1939-10-07 DRYOBIUS SEXNOTATUS SIX-BANDED LONGHORN BEETLE G? SH 1975-07-29 ELLIPSARIA LINEOLATA BUTTERFLY MUSSEL G4 sx PX 1919-PRE ELLIPSARIA LINEOLATA BUTTERFLY MUSSEL G4 sx PX 1919-PRE ELLIPTIC CRASSIDENS ELEPHANT EAR GS sx PX 1919-PRE ERIGENIA BULBOSA HARBINGER-OF-SPRING GS S2 PT PT 1988-03-29 ERIGENIA BULBOSA HARBINGER-OF-SPRING GS S2 PT PT 1993-04-08 ERIGENIA BULBOSA HARBINGER-OF-SPRING GS S2 PT PT 193S-04-06 ERIGENIA BULBOSA HARBINGER-OF-SPRING GS S2 PT PT 1940-04-20 ERIGENIA BULBOSA HARBINGER-OF-SPRING GS S2 PT PT 1922-04-22 ERIGENIA BULBOSA HARBINGER-OF-SPRING GS S2 PT PT 1970-04-11 FUSCONAIA FLAVA WABASH PIGTOE GS S2 PE 1919-??-?? FUSCONAIA FLAVA WABASH PIGTOE GS S2 PE 1919-PRE FUSCONAIA FLAVA WABASH PIGTOE GS S2 PE 1919-PRE FUSCONAIA FLAVA WABASH PIGTOE GS S2 PE 1919-PRE FUSCONAIA FLAVA WABASH PIGTOE GS S2 PE 1909-PRE FUSCONAIA SUBROTUNDA LONG-SOLID G3 S1S2 PE 1919-PRE FUSCONAIA SUBROTUNDA LONG-SOLID G3 S1S2 PE 1919-PRE GOMPHAESCHNA ANTILOPE SOUTHERN BOG DARNER G4 SH 1903-06-03 HYPERICUM DRUMMONDII NITS-AND-LICE GS sx TU PX 1927-09-14 ICTIOBUS BUBALUS SMALLMOUTH BUFFALO GS S1 PC CR 1978-0S-03 IGNEOUS MATERIALS IGNEOUS MATERIALS G? S? IODANTHUS PINNATIFIDUS PURPLE ROCKET GS S1 1-'E PE 1922-??-?? IODANTHUS PINNATIFIDUS PURPLE ROCKET GS S1 PE PE 1988-06-01 IOOANTHUS PINNATIFIDUS PURPLE ROCKET GS S1 PE PE 1891-06-10 JUNCUS TORREYI TORREY'S RUSH GS S2 PT PE 1887-06-02 LAMPSILIS ABRUPTA PINK MUCKET G2 sx PX LE 1919-PRE LEPISOSTEUS OSSEUS LONGNOSE GAR GS S2 PC CR 1983-06-07 LEPOMIS GULOSUS WARMOUTH GS S2 PC CR 1976-??-?? LEPTOOEA FRAGILIS FRAGILE PAPERSHELL GS S1 PT 1919-PRE LITHOSPERMUM LATIFOLIUM AMERICAN GROMWELL G4 S2 PE PE 1992-06-01 LITHOSPERMUM LATIFOLIUM AMERICAN GROMWELL G4 S2 PE PE 1881-0S-2S LITHOSPERMUM LATIFOLIUM AMERICAN GROMWELL G4 S2 PE PE 188S-09-17 LITHOSPERMUM LATIFOLIUM AMERICAN GROMWELL G4 S2 PE PE 1902-07-?? MATELEA OBLIQUA OBLIQUE MILKVINE G4? S1 PE PE 1896-10-01 MEEHANIA CORDATA HEARTLEAF MEEHANIA GS S1 TU PE 1902-06-08 MYRIOPHYLLUM HETEROPHYLLUM BROAD-LEAVED WATER·MILFOIL GS S1 PE PE 19S2-06-07 NOTROPIS BUCHANAN! GHOST SHINER GS S1 PC CR 1978-04-03 OBLIQUARIA REFLEXA THREEHORN WARTYBACK GS sx PX 1919-PRE OBOVARIA SUBROTUNDA ROUND HICKORYNUT G4 S1 cu 1919-PRE OBOVARIA SUBROTUNDA ROUND HICKORYNUT G4 S1 cu 1909-PRE 2 PNDI TRACKED SPECIES REPORTED FRCJ4 THE LOWER MONOGAHELA RIVER 04 JUN 1998 SCIENTIFIC NAME••••••••••••••••• ••• COM«lll NAME••••.••••••••••••••••••• GRANK •••• SRANK •••••• PA •••• PBS••• us •••••• LASTOBS•••

ONOSMIUM HISPIDISSI.._. FALSE GRCJ4WELL G4 S1 PE PE 1929-09-29 ONOSMIUM HISPIDISSI.._. FALSE GROM\IELL G4 S1 PE PE 1921-06-ZS OXYDENDRUM ARBOREUM SOURWOOD GS S3S4 TU TU 1940-08-10 OXYDENDRUM ARBOREUM SClJRWOOD GS S3S4 TU TU 1988-??·77 PASSIFLORA LUTEA PASSION-FLOWER GS S1 PE PE 1988-07-20 PASSIFLORA LUTEA PASSION-FLOWER GS S1 PE PE 1940-07-ZS PASSIFLORA LUTEA PASSION·FL

MACKIN ENGINEERING COMPANY David Zirnsky R.I.D.C. Park West 117 Industry Drive Pittsburgh, PA 15275-1015

Dear Mr. Zirnsky:

RE: Environmental Assessment Mackin Project NO. 3887-001 Monongahela River Conservation Plan Glenwood Bridge to Point Marion Allegheny/Washington/Fayette/Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania

I have examined the map accompanying your recent correspondence which shows the location forthe proposed above referenced project. Based on records maintained in the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) database and our own files, the followingrare or protected species are known fromthe vicinity of the project site. Please note that this review represents a general search of the U.S.G.S. quadrangles provided by your office.

Common Name Scientific Name PA Status Southern bog darner Gomphaeschna antilope Candidate Eastern Dancer Argia tibia/is Candidate Marked clubtail Stylurus notatusi Candidate Kirtland' s snake Clonophis kirtlandii Endangered Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus Candidate Ghost shiner Notropis buchanani Candidate Bullhead minnow Pimephales vigilax Candidate Smallmouth buffalo lctiobus bubalus Candidate River redhorse Moxostoma carinatum Candidate Warmouth Lepomis gulosus Candidate Three-ridge Amblema plicata Candidate Purple wartyback Cyclonaias tuberculata Candidate Butterfly mussel Ellipsaria lineolata Candidate Elephant ear Elliptio crassidens Candidate Snuffbox Epioblasma triquetra Candidate Wabash pig toe Fusconaia flava Candidate Long-solid Fusconaia subrotunda Candidate Pink mucket Lampsilis abrupta Candidate D. Zimsky December 12, 1997 Page 2

Fragile papershell Leptodea fragilis Candidate Threehom wartyback Obliquaria reflexa Candidate Round hickorynut Obovaria subrotunda Candidate Sheepnose mussel Plethobasus cyphyus Candidate Ohio pigtoe Pleurobema cordatum Candidate Pink heelsplitter Potamilus alaius Candidate Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrica Candidate Monkeyface Quadrula metanevra Candidate Pimpleback Quadrula pustulosa Candidate Pistolgrip mussel Tritogonia verrucosa· Candidate Rainbow mussel Villosa iris Candidate

If this project will involve any invasive environmental disturbance in addition to the River Conservation Plan, then further review will be required, including a detailed project description. Depending on the project, there maybe adverse impacts to those mussel species that are known from this section of the Monongahela River.

Thank you forthe opportunity to comment on this plan.

Please call me at (814) 359-5113 or (814) 359-5186 if you have any questions regarding my response.

Sincerely, �j-WMU1#dium_, fu Andrew L. �hi-;;;,-a Nongame and Endangered Species Unit

QM/sal cc: R. Snyder, PFBC APPENDIXG: Recreational Data

Landing Site Rating Criteria INFRASTRUCTURE Site Location/Name: ------Site Access ...... (Maximum Score = 27 Points)

Land Access (Existing): Maximum = 9 points

Type: ...... Maximum = 6 points Interstate ...... 3 State ...... 2 Local ...... 1

NOTES:

Condition: (based upon traffic, maintenance, type, etc.) ...... Maximum = 3 points Excellent ...... 3 Fair ...... 2 Poor ...... 1

NOTES:

Constraints: ...... Maximum = -3 points Railroad Crossing...... -1 Topography ...... -1 Restricted areas ...... -1 (i.e. private land, locks & dams)

NOTES:

River Access (Existing): Maximum = 18 points

Facility Type: ...... Maximum = 12 points PFBC ramp ...... 3 Marina ...... 3 Municipal ramp ...... 2 Private ramp ...... 1 Old lock ...... 1 Wharf wall ...... 1 Old ferrycrossing ...... 1

NOTES:

Ramp Type: ...... Maximum = 3 points Concrete ...... 3 Asphalt ...... 3 Aggregate ...... 2 Dirt...... 1

NOTES: Condition: ...... Maximum = 3 points Maintained ...... 3 Not maintained ...... 2 Abandoned ...... 1

NOTES:

Constraints:...... Maximum = -7 points Seasonal restrictions...... -1 Bridges ...... -1 Water depth ...... -1 Restricted areas ...... -1 Wake zones ...... -1 Locks ...... -1 Size of landing (> 50 ft) ....-1

NOTES:

Site Infrastructure ...... (Maximum Score = 16 Points)

Existing Infrastructure:...... Maximum = 8 points Utility Access ( electric, telephone) ...... 2 Sewage/Water ...... 2 Parking Facilities ...... 2 Pedestrian Access ...... 2

NOTES:

Access to Available Land for:...... Maximum = 8 Points Landing Site Development ...... 2 Parking ...... 2 Industrial Reuse ...... 2 Commercial Development ...... 2

NOTES:

TOTAL OVERALL INFRASTRUCTURE ...... MAXIMUM = 43 POINTS Total Points received= Landing Site Rating Criteria AMENITIES Site Location/Name------

Historical Attributes Maximum Score = 10 Points Registered Historic District Registered Historic Structure Eligible Historic District Eligible Historic Structure Locally Recognized Structures Existing Thematic Programs/ Projects

NOTES:

Cultural Attributes Maximum Score = 10 Points Festivals Craft Shows Shops for Cultural items or Local Crafts Cultural Events Museums Theaters Arts Community

NOTES:

Recreational Attributes Maximum Score = 10 Points Federal Parks National Parks State Parks Regional Parks Local Parks Recreational Trails Marinas Amusement Parks Golf Courses

NOTES:

Commercial Attributes (existing) (Maximum Score = 5 Points) Access to Shopping/Retail Access to Restaurants Access to Lodging AAA (Approved/Rated) Facility B&B Hotel/Motel Camping

NOTES: Natural Area Attributes {Maximum Score = 5 Points) Game Lands NaturalHeritage Areas

NOTES:

TOTAL OVERALL AMENTIES ...... MAXIMUM= 40 POINTS Total Points received= APPENDIX K: Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality, Final Report The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 1 of28

The Strategy for Improving Water-Quality Monitoring in the United States---Final Report of the Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality Table of Contents General Intent Background Historyof the IntergovernmentalTask Force on Monitoring Water Quality Previous Reports Definitionsand Scope Historical Context Water-QualityQuestions Uses of Water-Quality Information Findings andChanges Needed Nationwide Strategy forImproving Water-QualityMonitoring Goal-Oriented Monitoring and Indicators Gathering and Evaluating Existing InformationGaps and Priorities Flexible and Comprehensive Monitoring Institutional Collaboration Federal Programs State and Tribal Programs State and Tribal Teams Watershed Managers Compliance and Ambient Monitoring Volunteer Monitoring Methods Comparability InformationAutomation, Accessibility, and Utility Assessment and Reporting Evaluation of Monitoring Activities Ground-Water and Other SpecificWater-Resource Considerations Project on Biological Integrityof SurfaceWaters Training Pilot Studies Incentives Implementation National Water-QualityMonitoring Council Methods and Data ComparabilityBoard Environmental Indicators GuidanceCommittee Data-Elements Glossary Funding Initial Agency Actions to Improve Monitorine Conclusion http://water.us gs.gov /public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 2 of28

References General Intent This is the third and finalreport ofthe IntergovernmentalTask Force on Monitoring Water Quality (ITFM). It proposes changes in water-quality monitoring that are needed to support sound decisionmaking at all levels ofgovernment and in the private sector. The proposed changesin water-quality monitoring are necessaryto obtain a better returnon public and private investments in monitoring, environmental protection, and natural-resources management.Implementing the strategy andrecommendations is necessary to achievenationwide water-quality goals to protect human health, to preserve and restore healthy ecological conditions, and to sustain a viable economy. The proposed strategy will expand the base ofinformation usefulfor multiple purposes and a variety of users. In some cases, ITFM recommendations ratifyand encourage ongoing efforts.In other cases, ITFM calls for fundamental changes in the ways that water-quality-monitoring programs are defined, designed, prioritized, conducted, and funded. Background History of the Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality The ITFM was formedin early 1992 in response to Office of Management and Budget (0MB) Memorandum No. 92--01. This memorandum set forthspecific requirements to review andevaluate water-quality-monitoring activities nationwide and to recommend improvements. Also, it delegated lead-agency responsibility forwater informationcoordination to the USGS. The 0MB memorandum and the Terms ofReference of the ITFM are provided in the ITFM first-yearreport (IntergovernmentalTask Force on Monitoring Water Quality, 1992). The ITFM is a Federal/State or Tribal partnershipthat includes representatives from 20 Federal, State, Tribal, and interstate organizations. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) serves as co-chair, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) serve as co-chair and the executive secretariat.In addition to the 20 officiallydesignated ITFM representatives, more than 150 individuals in Federal and State agencies participate in nine working groups to provide additional perspective and technical expertise. Private sector organizations also participate in the process through the Federal Advisory Committee on Water Data forPublic Use, public meetings announced in the Federal Register, and an initiative to promote coordination of ambientand compliance monitoring. The work of the ITFM is sponsored by the Federal interdepartmentalWater Information Coordination Program. Previous Reports The two preceding ITFM reports provide informationthat will enhanceunderstanding of the recommendations in this finalreport. In December 1992, the ITFM completed its first-yearreport, Ambient Water-QualityMonitoring in the United States: First Year Review, Evaluation, and Recommendations. The report focusedon the evaluation ofcurrent ambient-monitoring effortsand the opportunities forimprovement. The report concluded that monitoring programs must keep pace with changing water-management programs, a collaborative strategy is needed to link the many separate monitoring programs, a genuine appreciation ofthe need for cooperation currently exists among monitoring agencies, and recent advances in technology provide new opportunities for interaction and cooperation. The report recommended that an integrated, voluntary, nationwide strategy should be designed and implemented to improve water-quality monitoring in this country.

The ITFM published its second yearreport, Water-QualityMonitoring in the United States: 1993 Report of the Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality, in June 1994. This report documented the ITFM's recommendations forthe technical "building blocks" needed to implement http ://water. usgs. gov/public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 3 of28 the strategy and presented for public review the supporting technical reports prepared by the ITFM working groups. These technical reports, which were published as separate appendixes, address monitoring frameworks, environmental indicators, methods comparability, data management and sharing, resource assessment andreporting, and ground-water issues. Also, the second-year report contains informationabout a pilot project in Wisconsin designed to test ITFM assumptions and recommendations. [See the inside frontcover of this present report forinformation needed to order the previous reports.] Definitionsand Scope The ITFM recommendations address the fullrange of aquatic resources, which include ground and surfacewaters and freshand marine environments, in the United States. Internationalconsiderations also are importantbut are beyond the scope of this report. Canada and Mexico, however, have been very interested in ITFM activities, and the ITFM envisions futurework with agencies in other countries. To identifyimprovements needed to support more effective decisionmaking,the ITFM broadly definedmonitoring functions. To identifythe multiple elements of a complex subject clearly, the ITFM identifiedfive major purposesfor monitoring. Table 1 lists the ITFM consensus definitions foraquatic resources and monitoring functionsand the purposes of water-quality monitoring. A glossary of termsused by the ITFM is provided in Technical Appendix A. Table 1. Key Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality Definitions.

Key ITFM definitions

Aquatic resources Surface and ground waters, estuaries, and near

waters. Associated aquatic communities and physical hab

which include wetlands. Sediments.

Aquatic resources data Physical, which includes quantity.

Chemical/toxicological.

Biological/ecological.

Associated data needed to interpret the aquatic

including habitat, land use, demographics,

contaminant discharges, and other "ancillary"

information,such as atmospheric deposition.

Monitoring program activities Identifying and documenting program goals and

purposes.

Designing and planning monitoring programs.

Coordinating and collaborating with other monit agencies. http://water. usgs. gov /public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni... Page 4 of28

Selecting environmental indicators.

Locating appropriate monitoring sites.

Selecting data-collection methods.

Collecting field observations and samples. Analyzing samples in laboratories.

Developing and operating quality-assurance prog Storing, managing, and sharing data.

Interpreting and assessing data to produce usef

information.

Reporting and distributing monitoring results t different audiences.

Evaluating the effectiveness of monitoring prog

Purposes of monitoring Assessing status and trends (includes spatial a temporal variability).

Characterizing and ranking existing and emergin

Designing and implementing programs and project

Evaluating program and project effectiveness.

Responding to emergencies (ITFM did not address

Historical Context Control ofwater pollution becamea major environmental priority during the last three decades, and in response, water-quality monitoring has expanded rapidly. In the 1970's, Federal and State governmentsbegan requiring the regulated community---industry, public water suppliers, municipalities, and others---to monitor water quality. The resulting data are being used to demonstrate compliance with pollution-control permits and to obtain informationrequired to estimate pollution loading fromhuman sources into the environment. Today, tens ofthousands of public and private organizationsspend hundreds of millions ofdollars a year on compliance monitoring. These important compliance-monitoring effortsfocus on well-defined sources ofpollution, such as industrial facilities, sewage-treatment plants, or waste-disposal sites. The primary intent is to characterize the concentrations ofwater-quality constituents at their sources, or "the ends ofpipes." In part, point-source concentrations ofpollution were the initial focus ofregulatory monitoring because knowledge ofthe interactions between human activities and natural systems was more limited than it is today. Point sources are easier to defineand monitor compared with nonpoint sources. As a result, more money has been spent on point-source-compliance monitoring than on either nonpoint or ambient monitoring. As a furtherresult, few ambient-monitoring programs assessed overall water quality and the causes and sources of nonpoint-source and habitat problems.

http:/ /water. usgs. gov /public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 5 of28 When it became widely apparent in the late 1980's that water-quality protection and management goals could not be achieved without considering point and nonpoint sources ofpollution, as well as habitat degradation, the need to reshape the overall monitoring strategy became clear. Thus, the public and the private sectors have initiated several new ambient-monitoring and assessment efforts (IntergovernmentalTask Force on Monitoring Water Quality, 1992). However, significantgaps remained, and until the ITFM effort, coordination among the various new programs was uneven. Today, agreement is widespread that existing data programs cannot be added together to provide all the informationneeded to answer the more recent complex questions about national or regional water quality (National Research Council, 1987, 1990a, b; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987; Knopman and Smith, 1992). Wide recognition ofthe need to improve water-quality monitoring to accomplish clearly defined objectives and to obtain better ambient andcompliance informationhas bolstered the ITFM's effortsto develop a strategy. Fortunately, technology has advanced during the last 25 years. Better tools and knowledge are now available, and a monitoring strategy can now be created to support the development of policies and programs that targetavailable resources to priority problems within watersheds, ecosystems, and specificgeographic areas. It is now possible to develop a monitoring strategy that will be usefulfor evaluating the effectiveness ofresource-management and environmental protection actions. Monitoring to evaluate program effectivenessis needed not only to protect human health and ecosystems, but also to ensure that money is spent wisely. From 1972 through 1986, the total public and private costs forwater-pollution abatement exceeded $500 billion (Carlin and the Environmental Law Institute, 1990), and by the end of this century, hundreds ofbillions of dollars more will be spent (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990). Institutional and technical changesare needed to improve water-quality monitoring and to meet the full range ofmonitoring requirements. The proposed strategy provides a long-term blueprint for making the changes that are needed. As more organizations adopt the recommendations and become partners in implementing the strategy, the nationwide capability to assess water-quality conditions will grow. As a result, the information gatheredfrom implementing the strategy will be greater than the sum of the measurements produced by individual organizations. Water-Quality Questions Water-quality monitoring provides an objective source of information to answer questions that support the wise management of vital water resources. Appropriate ambient and compliance monitoring provides the basis for informedmanagement throughout the decisionmaking process (Figure 1 below). Adequate monitoring is needed at many scales---site, watershed, State, Tribal, regional, and national. Historically, some questions have been difficultor impossible to answer, especially at the regional and the national scales. Improved monitoring is needed to assess the quality of essentially all the Nation's water resources in a targeted way that will provide quantitative answers to the followingquestions:

• What is the condition of the Nation's surface, ground, estuarine, and coastal waters? • Where, how, and why are water-quality conditions changing over time? • Where are the problems related to water-quality? What is causing the problems? • Are programs to prevent or remediate problems working effectively? • Are water-quality goals and standards being met?

http ://water. usgs. gov/public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 6 of28 Uses of Water-Quality Information Monitoringprograms over the past 3 decades have provided large amounts of data; many of these data have not been analyzedto provide water-quality managers and regulators with the information needed to managewater resources relative to the questions listed above. One potential explanation forthis lack of data analysisis a limited appreciation of the uses and the users are of water-quality information. In fact, monitoring informationis used by Federal, State, and Tribal governments; legislators; regulators andnatural-resources managers; private industry; scientists; academia; and the general public. Users and uses of water-quality information includethe following:

• Citizens.---Need information to understandenvironmental risks, exercise environmental stewardship through responsible behavior, and support needed policy and program changes. • Legislators.---Develop water-quality and related resource goals, policies, and programs and evaluate progress in achieving the goals. • Regulators.---Plan, operate, and evaluate programs; protect public health, aquatic habitats, and wildlifepopulations; determineif water-quality standards and permit requirements are being met; and take appropriate enforcement actionwhen necessary. • Resource managers.---Develop plans and policies, support operational decisions, resolve water-use disputes, and evaluate the success of programs. • Municipalities and industries.---Plan and manage water supplies and discharges; identifysites fordevelopment, preservation, and other purposes; and comply with water-quality standards and permits. • Environmental groups.---Evaluate governmentpolicies and programs and identifyproblems that need to be addressed. • Scientists.---Improve understandingof the relations amongecological, chemical, physical, biological, and hydrological processes and conditions. Findings and Changes Needed The ITFM members have foundthat there are opportunities to improve current water-quality-monitoring effortsnationwide in the public and the private sectors. Although many individual monitoring networks have been well designed to meet their own goals, data solely from these networks oftenwill not provide a broad and comprehensive assessment of water quality at national, interstate, State, Tribal, or watershed scales. Also, data fromsome of the net-works cannot be readily shared and integrated to help with similar assessments in related areas. The ITFM identified several kinds of problems for which changes are recommended in later sections of this report. The changes needed are summarized as follows:

• Identifyindicators to measure goals.---It is critical that the specific purposes and goals for a monitoring program be identifiedas it is being designed. This establishes a foundation for choosing indicators to measure progress toward meeting water-quality goals or to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and policies. • Allocate monitoring resources on the basis of water-qualitygoals, conditions, and uses. ---The United States cannot affordto monitor all geographic locations by using the same frequency, spatial density, selection of indicators, or other design factors. A rationale is needed to target monitoring resources more effectively on the basis of the goals, conditions, and uses of the waters. For instance, monitoring designs to assess potable supplies in Arizona need to be different from designs to monitor salmon habitat in the PacificNorthwest. • Integrate surface- and ground-water monitoring.---Water-quality and water-quantity informationfor fresh and saline surface- andground-water resources need to be integrated. Ground- and surface-watersystems arehydraulically connected. Land- and water-use and other human activities within watersheds affect waterquality on the surfaceand underground. However, the scopes of individual monitoring programsare limited by the sponsoring http://water.us gs.gov/p ublic/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98

The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni... Page 11 of28 Thousands of organizations operate water-quality-monitoring programs andprojects nationwide. Collaboration is necessarybecause fewsingle organizations can affordto collect all the information needed forinformed decisionmaking. The strategy to integrate these diverse institutional effortsis to establish collaborative partnershipsof multiorganizational teamsat national, interstate, State or Tribal, and watershed levels. These teams should include municipal, private, and volunteer monitoring groups. Formal mechanismsare needed at the national and the State or Tribal le�els to ensure effectiveplanning and coordination formonitoring efforts.At the watershed and the mterstate levels, planningand coordination mechanisms need to be flexibleenough to adapt to changing situations and resource limitations (Figure 2).

�(39K .gif file) Figure 2. Key monitoring relations.

Federal Programs Like other monitoring efforts, Federal programs are designed to meet mission-specificobjectives. [See the firstyear report (IntergovernmentalTask Force on Monitoring Water Quality, 1992, Appendix B) fora description ofrelevant Federal programs]. Collectively, they could convey a reasonably complete nationwide or regional story about water quality. As part ofthe nationwide strategy, the ITFM proposes that national monitoring programs collaborateto provide a strong ambient-water-quality frameworkwithin which States, Tribes, andwatersheds could contribute their geographically specificinformation. Non-Federal organizations should be involved in collaborating with and advising Federal programs and be able to access Federal informationeasily. Federal programs should among themselves identifycommon physical, chemical, and biological indicators, referenceconditions, and comparable core parameters to share and report together. Major Federal informationsystems should be linked through shared referencetables, minimum data elements, common data-element definitionsand names, and information-transfersoftware, such as Internetor MOSAIC. Federal agencies with national status and trends programsor major water-resources responsibilities are shown in Figure 3 below. The ITFM strategy includes an annual meeting ofall managers ofFederal water-status and water-trends programs to report on the previous year's monitoring results, to coordinate the future workplan, and to collaborate on nationwide products. In addition, the ITFM recommends that an advisory group be formedto support the major Federal ambient-assessment programs, such as the USGS's National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program and the National Stream Quality Accounting Network (NASQAN), the USEPA's Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Status andTrends Program (NS&T), and the National Biological Service's (NBS) Biomonitoring of EnvironmentalStatus and Trends (BEST) Program. This advisory group would fosterbetter integration ofFederal programs and more effectiveuse ofavailable resources. It would include members fromall levels ofgovernment and the private sector. Currently, some Federal programs have their own advisory committeesto support program-specificissues that require additional attention. As needed, these should continue as working groups of the assessment advisory group. The Administration should consider issuing an Executive order to provide guidance to Federal agencies about their activities and participation. Active Federal leadership is needed to support such nationwide effortsas developing standardsand guidelines, sharing data, leveraging program resources, facilitatingtechnology transfer,and building consensus.

http:/ /water. usgs. gov /pub lic/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 12 of28

_:1(56K .giffile) Figure 3. Federal Agencies and National Status andTrends Programs. State and Tribal Programs States and Tribes report water-quality status to the USEPA in the biennial 305(b) reports. USEPA has identified two concerns about its national report aggregated fromthe State reports. First, the data fromthe States and the Tribes are oftennot comparable and makea consistent aggregation of data at larger scales, especially the interstate and the national, difficult.Second, States and Tribes assess considerably less than all their water resources in any 2-year reporting period, in part, because many State budgets for monitoring programs have decreased over the years. The ITFM recommendationsof a 6-yearcycle forthe 305(b) report (5 years vs. current 2 years if legislative changes aremade) and increased State comparability of assessment andcollection methods would answer the concerns.In addition, some State and Tribal programs now are using program designs that allow them to monitor their water resources over a longer time period, say 5 to 10 years, oftentargeting their limited resbiological indicators, reference conditions,and comparable core parameters to shareand report together. Major Federal information systemsshould be linked sources to address specificissues. In other words, some States and Tribes are already using revolving watershed assessments and priority systems similar to the approach endorsed by the ITFM. The ITFM recommends that a redesign of State and Tribal monitoring programs begin with evaluating, synthesizing, and mapping existing informationthat would actively involve many different monitoring partners ina collaborative effort.This collaborative effortwould include the following:

• Delineate the area.---The boundaries of water areas need to be determined. Depending on the objective of the program, the boundariesmay be political or natural, such as hydro logic systems or ecosystems. Whichever method is chosen, GIS overlays ofthe boundaries should be available. • Map the waters.---Key informationabout the chosen areas, which includes locating impaired waters, special protection waters, andunimpaired waters, as previously described, needs to be portrayed. The ITFM recommends using the RF3 as a uniform wayto identifywaters. The RF3 is a computer-mapping system that includes codes for surface waters,the direction of flow, and stream-reach locations. The USGS's Regional Aquifer System Analysisis the best source ofinformation on major ground-water aquifers. • Map scientificknowledge and human influences.---Scientific information and human influences need to be overlaid on the basic map ofsurface andground waters. Several examples are listed as follows: • Natural and political boundaries, which include watersheds, municipalities, counties, and States. • Surface-watercharacteristics, which include water bodies, hydrography, hydrologic characteristics, biological communities, and waste-water treatment plants. • Human infrastructures and activities, such as land use or water intakeand effluent dischargefacilities and nonpoint sources. • Ground-water characteristics, which include vertical and lateral extent and hydraulic properties of aquifers andconfined units, waste-injection sites, and landfills. • Natural characteristics, such as soils, geology, altitude, dominant vegetation, and precipitation values. • Map the desired goals for the waters.---The goals that residents wish their waters to meet should be shown as overlays on a multilayer map. These goals will include the water-quality http://water.us gs.gov /public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy for Improving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 13 of28 standards that States and Tribes set fortheir waters and also may include specificadditional goals that, forinstance, a watershed team may desire. The ITFM recommends that comprehensive assessments of State or Tribal water resources be conducted by using criteria shown in table 2. In this design, States and Tribes would first characterize their waters with available information andknowledge. Then, on a 5- to 10-year rotating basis or other design (at the discretion of the State or Tribe), they would comprehensively assess their water resources by using differentmonitoring intensities and techniques according to the conditions of the water bodies andother factors,as described above. Volunteer and private sector monitoring can be integrated into any of the three program priorities, and data fromFederal, State, Tribal, local, andprivate assessments could be shared in all categories. Statistical monitoring designs, as well as targeted and intensive surveys,also canbe integrated. State and Tribal Teams The ITFM recommends the establishment of collaborative teams at the State or Tribal level that would include representatives of all the major monitoring sectors active in the jurisdictions. The primary responsibility forpromoting collaborative water-monitoring and assessment programs should reside with a national monitoring council andwith the State or Tribal teams. In some places, the establishment or use of existing monitoring teams may be appropriate. For example, each State or Tribal team also should include, as needed, representatives from Federal, regional, and local agencies, and other institutions, such as universities, industrial organizations, and volunteer monitoring groups that collect and analyze surface and ground-water information within the State or Tribal geographic area. The State or Tribal and regional teams would have several principal functions.They would clarify roles and responsibilities andfacilitate communication and collaboration amongFederal, State, Tribal, interstate, local, and private water-monitoring and assessment programs that participate in the strategy. They would identifymajor issues or programsthat joint effortscould address most effectively.Also, the teams would tailor the national guidelines to meet regional needs and encourage their adoption by participatingagencies and institutions. Watershed Managers Managers of local watershed resources need aggregated data froma variety of sources to guide their policies and activities. To help meet this need, the ITFM recommends that a National Water-Quality Monitoring Council develop a guidance document that summarizes where existing data can be found. Some organizations are already addressing this need. The U.S. Forest Service (1994) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1991) have written watershed-assessment handbooks; the U.S. Forest Service (USPS) handbook describes ecosystem management for forestedwatersheds. The Soil Conservation Service (1994) has prepared a handbook on monitoring water-quality conditions that arerelated to agricultural activities. The American Society forTesting and Materials (ASTM) is developing a standardfor water-quality monitoring in conjunction with the ITFM. As part of the nationwide strategy, the proposed National Water-Quality Monitoring Council will work with agencies, private and volunteer organizations,and academia to produce a handbookfor monitoring and assessing water-quality watersheds that is applicable fornationwide use. The ITFM encourages agencies at all governmental levels to develop and evaluate monitoring and assessment programs by using the frameworks formonitoring program design that are described in Technical Appendixes Band L. The ITFM also promotes the coordination of new and existing ambient- and compliance-monitoring programsto provide needed information within watersheds and other geographic areas of concernfor all potential data users. Each monitoring program is specificto its geographic location and purpose. At the sametime, each is a part of the nationwide monitoring effort to generate informationon surface- or ground-water conditions, which is the basis forregional and nationwide descriptions of water quality. Unless each monitoring program develops comparable

http://water.us gs.gov /public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98

The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 18 of28 data can be more easily shared by using networked systems. This permits andencourages the distribution ofdata-management and data-storage responsibilities. The use ofmultiple systems also allows and encourages the distribution of data-management responsibility, as well as the data. • Standard export formats and existing query systems, such as WAIS, MOSAIC, and Internet, should be used to share data and informationwith other users. • Remote sensing and LANDSATcapabilities should be more widely investigated and used. • Computer security concernsmust be identified and addressed. Assessment and Reporting Better processes and methods are required to share monitoring findings and results among national, regional, State, and Tribal resource-assessment programs. Also, guidelines and tools are needed that describe ways to aggregate and interpret informationfor regional and national summariesof water conditions and trends. Technology transfershould be promoted among various national and State reporting programs, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture Resource Conservation Assessment, the USGS's biennial National Water Summaries, and the States' and the USEPA's 305(b) reports to Congress that are mandated by the CleanWater Act. The strategy encourages and helps resource-assessment programs produce publications that meet the needs ofa wider audience. It is not sufficientfor technical assessment programs to communicate only with their technical peers; they also must communicate with a broad audience that is concerned with the overall significanceof their assessments. This requires a carefulanalysis ofaudiences and an approach to communication that recognizes the particular style, format,media, and content considerations appropriate to each audience. As a corollary activity, mechanisms are needed to ensure the best uses ofthe technical information derivedfrom assessment activities. Interpretationsofresults fromnational programs and the integration ofresults from State and regional programsshould lead to similar conclusions about the conditions of our Nation's water. The only differences in interpretations should be in the areal extent ofcoverage (presumably broader coverage forthe national programs) and the degree ofresolution (presumably finerresolution forthe regional, State, and Tribal programs). Both types ofprograms are critical components in the nationwide strategy. Improved mechanismsfor performing and sharingtop/down and bottom/up interpretation, assessment, and aggregation ofwater-resources informationwill make it possible to produce informationproducts more quickly afterresource assessments are completed. However, complex review and approval procedures within many agencies can cause significantdelays in releasing those products to their intended audiences. Implementation of an effectivenational strategy must address issues oftimeliness and audience identificationfor reporting, integrating informationacross disciplines, comparing data analyses and interpretations, and providing mechanisms forinformation aggregation (see Technical Appendixes J and K). Modeling is an assessment tool that uses data, helps identifydata needs, and allows management decisions to be made on the basis of predictions. Implementation of the ITFM strategy should include use of modeling. Evaluation of Monitoring Activities Collaborative teams at all levels should periodically evaluate their monitoring activities to confirm that they are meeting their objectives in the most effectiveand economical manner. The successor to the ITFM should produce a report every 5 yearsto evaluate water-quality-monitoring activities and to document progress in implementing the nationwide strategy and making appropriate adjustments. This report should include a summary ofwater-monitoring activities over the previous 5 years, an evaluation ofthe applicability of the monitoring program, and the Nation's ability to obtain and share http://water.usgs.gov /public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 19 of28 informationneeded to evaluate water quality. The report should present successes at the national and the watershed scales and should identifycontinuing barriers to understanding water-quality conditions. This report should not address the status of water-quality conditions; existing Federal, regional, State, and Tribal agencies have that responsibility. However, greater collaboration and informationsharing should enhance the individual reports. Ground-Water and Other SpecificWater-Resource Considerations Selected categories of aquatic resources should receive specificattention when water-quality-monitoring programsare planned and implemented. These categories include ground water, wetlands, lakes,and coastal water. For these categories, additional guidance and recommendations areneeded to supplement the general information providedthroughout this report. The ITFM has addressed some of the monitoring issues specificto ground water, and the results are discussed below. However, additional work needs to be done on the other three categories. Focus groups of appropriate experts are needed to develop guidelines and to make recommendations for these threeresource categories. Historically, ambient-water-quality considerations have focused on surface-waters. The original goals of the Clean Water Act primarily targeted State-designateduses forsurface waters. Surfaceand ground waters are,however, hydraulically connected. Geochemical processes are reflectedin the quality of ground water and can profoundlyaffect surface-water quality and aquatic biota because approximately 40 percent of flowingsurface watercomes fromground water. Water-quality-monitoring programs must consider differencesin spatial, temporal, andother characteristics between ground- and surface-waterresources. Ground water normallyis not easily accessed formonitoring, and suitable wells must be located or drilled (except in special circumstances). Further, ground water has distinct three-dimensional distributions within geologic formationsof rock and soil that are oftenin units that have very differentphysical, chemical, and biological characteristics. In particular,water flowsin aquifersat extremely slow rates compared with surface-water-flow rates. For example, ground water may move fractionsof an inch per day, or even per year, while streams and rivers frequentlymove miles per day. As a result of these andother differences, ground-water interactions with the biosphere and lithosphere differsignificantly from the interactions of surface waters.The ITFM recognized these differences and accordingly established a special focusgroup forground-water monitoring to ensure that ITFM proposals, such as the frameworkfor monitoring programs (Technical Appendix B), address specificground-water needs. Additional results of the deliberations of the Ground Water.Focus Group are presented in Technical Appendix L, and their work is continuing to address indicators for ground-water monitoring. Project on Biological Integrity of SurfaceWaters As an initial step in implementing the nationwide monitoring strategy, the ITFM proposes that existing informationabout the biological conditions of streams and rivers be gathered and evaluated. In addition to supporting the goal to conserve and enhanceecosystems, this biological evaluation would initiate the implementation of technical concepts and institutional collaboration integral to the strategy. Most water-monitoring networks were designed andimplemented at a time when detection and control of chemical pollutants in water was of paramountimportance. Now, however, the need foraquatic biological informationis more widely recognized. In addition, the biological evaluation would integrate information from different organizations, show data gaps, and test recommendations designed to improve informationcompatibility. Because of differencesin monitoring purposes, various Federal, State, and Tribal programs produce data that varyin parameters, spatial density, frequencyof collection, analysis methods, and level of QA. Further actions followingthe initial data gathering would need to be implemented through a series of http://water. usgs. gov/pub lic/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni... Page 20 of28 iterations of data collection, data interpretation, andvoluntary refocusing over an extended time period. The NBS is a key agency to participatein this project. Training One of the key implementation issues is that training must be available to all Federal, regional, State, Tribal, local, private, and volunteer personnel involved in water monitoring. Training would be the cornerstone to promoting the use of the monitoring framework, the correct use of environmental indicators, the application of comparable methods of sample collection techniques and analytical methods, the storage and sharing of environmental data, and the use of new methods to interpret and report results. Training programs are now available in such organizations as the USGS, the USEPA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), the U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, associations, societies, and the Water Resources Research Institutes and academic organizations.A collaborative effortis needed to conduct water-monitoring and data-management training. Training should include monitoring and data management forwater quality. Training would be tailored to selected audiences, which would include managerswho use water-quality information fordecisionmaking, researchscientists, field andlaboratory technicians, and interested members of public, volunteer, andprivate organizations. An interagency training team should be formed at the national level to coordinate an inventory of training programs now available frompublic agencies, academic institutions, and private organizations and the development of a list of training needs and the number of trainees anticipated, training materials, and plans to meet identifiedtraining for differentsectors. Participating agencies should make training available at various locations across the country on a continuing basis; the training would use formaland informal formats as appropriate. The collaborative training plansshould include a QA program to measure the effectivenessof training effortsand should include a complete review every 5 years. Training may not be fullyimplemented forseveral yearsbecause of the massive effortthat will be required to organize and operate a coordinated nationwide training effort. It also is important to broaden training into collaboration and education. Many groups, such as the Nature Conservancy, the Ecological Society of America, and the Association of Environmental Engineering Professors, were involved in commenting on or were suggested as collaborators for implementation of the strategy for nationwide monitoring. Pilot Studies Before some ITFM proposals are implemented nationwide, additional pilot studies are needed. Groups working at the national level need feedbackto move fromstrategy to tactics for implementation. More tailored guidance is needed to ensure that the flexibilityrequired in different areas of the country is accommodated. In addition, informationon implementation costs and on the savings that result fromimprovements also are needed. Although the ITFM believes that many improvements to monitoring can be accomplished within available resources, such improvements must be thoughtfullyplanned and coordinated. When programupdates or new monitoring efforts are funded, the ITFM recommendations can be more readily accommodated. However, special caremust be taken to ensure that attempts to implement aspects of the strategy by using available monitoring resources do not adversely impact existing monitoring that now supports critical objectives. Incentives Because of its voluntary nature, the strategy proposed by ITFM must offertangible benefitsto encourage organizations that monitor or fund water-quality activities to participatein the strategy. The major incentives forparticipation are discussed below: http://water.usgs.gov/public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 21 of28

• By improving water-quality informationnationwide, public and private organizationscan increase the effectivenessof natural-resources managementand environmentalprotection efforts and can document the benefitsof actions taken. This will answer the water-quality questions listed at the beginning of this report that Federal agencies are oftenasked by Congress and that agencies at all scales areasked by the public. Multiple agencies with varied expertise and responsibilities working together on the same problem will have the information necessary to achieve comprehensive ecosystem managementfor aquatic and related terrestrial resources. Managers will be able to make more effectivedecisions and to consider policies and programs more comprehensively. Disagreements among agencies about water-quality conditions and assessment results will be fewer, and it will be possible to base more decisions on objective informationrather than on opinion. State, Tribal, and local agencies with enforcementresponsibilities will have a better technical basis for taking regulatory action. The regulated community will have more complete knowledge to ensure that actions required of them will correct environmentalproblems. Better, more comprehensive informationwill improve theconnection between public programs and the conditions they are supposed to address. • Because data collection will be coordinated, use of available resources will be more effective, and effortswill not be duplicated. Monitoring programs that evolve froma coordinated effort among major data-collecting agencies in an area will provide more complete coverage in space, time, and parameters.The resulting informationwill better support decisionmaking for complex contemporary problems and allow forjoint monitoring and assessment of water-quantityand water-quality and surface- and ground-water issues. Partnerships among agencies responsible forcompliance- and ambient-monitoring programs will be able to design programs that complement each other. These coordinated and collaborative programs produce a consistent distributed data set that is jointly supported by many agencies and that includes agreed-upon data-quality-control measurements. The coordination and collaboration also will identifythe ancillary data, as well as the scale andaccuracy, that is needed. • Participantsin the ITFM strategy will have tools to monitor water quality more effectively. Examplesof these tools include: • Commonformat for designing monitoring programs. • Comparable use of indicators. • Comparable performance-basedmethods used for field and laboratory work. • Consistent QA/QC activities that produce data of known quality. • Metadata collected and recorded to aid with interpretations. • Ancillary data needs identified, located, and shared. • Compatible data-storage system. • Software that encourages data sharing. • Methods fordata analysis. • Examples and guidelines for publishing and speaking to many types of audiences. • Formats for evaluating the effectivenessof monitoring programs. • Valuable services will be provided for participants in the strategy. The services will include guidance and advice on new pollutants, new research methods, and interagency questions. The ITFM will be able to review and advise on newly designed monitoring programs, as well as on agency and organization collaboration among existing ones. • The training program to promote the use of guidelines and recommendations will be available to all participants and will bring together talents, skills, and knowledge from Federal, State, Tribal, watershed, local, and private representatives and volunteers. • The credibility of water-quality information will improve as many organizations produce the information and agree on its assessment and presentation. Implementation An institutional infrastructure is needed to support the implementation of the strategy. The http://water.us gs.gov/pub li c/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni... Page 22 of28 infrastructure should include a national collaboration forum and formalor informal State and Tribal implementation teams. If State or Tribal entities identifythe need forregional or watershed-level implementation teams, then regional teamsalso should be used to carryout the strategy. It is importantto the success of the strategy that existing collaborative mechanisms be used to the extent possible. Maximumflexibility is needed at the interstate, the regional, and the watershed levels to assure effectiveimplementation. Figure 4 shows an overview ofthe proposed organizational framework.

National Water-Quality Monitoring Council A National Water-Quality Monitoring Council will be established to carry forward national aspects oft he strategy. The National Council would develop guidance and tools to provide technical support and serve as a forum for collaborative program planning. The viewpoints ofbusiness, academia, and volunteers arecritical to the successfulimplementation of the strategy. Membership on the National Council would include the private sector, volunteer monitoring organizations, and government agencies at all levels---Federal, State, Tribal, interstate, and local. Non-Federal representation would be drawn fromvarious geographic areas of the country to cover the fullrange of natural, social, and economic settings. The National Council would operate as part of the Water Information Coordination Program (WICP), which is required by 0MB MemorandumNo. 92--01. A draftcharter for the proposed National Council is presented in Technical Appendix C. The National Council would assume broad responsibility forpromot ing implementation of the nationwide monitoring strategy and the ITFM recommendations that would improve monitoring and resource assessments in the United States. In principle, the National Council would facilitate monitoring and assessment programs to fulfilltheir intended initial purpose and support national compatibility and informationsharing where purposes overlap. The National Council would be concernedw ith water monitoring, which has been broadly definedto include measuring the physical, chemical/toxicological, and biological/ecological characteristics of surface and ground waters, including freshwater, marine, and wetlands, as well as associated data that involve habitat, land use, demographics, weather, and atmospheric deposition. The National Council would coordinate its activities with the ongoing work of the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), which is authorized by 0MB Circular A--16. The National Council would be concerned with the monitoring ofstreams, rivers, lakes, estuaries, wetlands, coastal and ground waters, sewer and industrial outflows, andpublic drinking-water sources (not finished water). It would consider the following monitoring purposes, which are implemented by individual monitoring agencies: to assess status and trends, to identifyand rank existing andemerging problems, to design and implement programs, to determine whether goals and standards are being met, to assure regulatory compliance, to facilitate responses to emergencies, to support hydrologic research, and to help target monitoring, prevention, and remediation resources. The National Council would issue voluntary guidelines to promote consistency. These guidelines would address the comparability of field and laboratory methods, recommended minimum sets of parameters forspecific monitoring purposes, environmental indicators, QA programs, metadata requirements, data management and sharing,and reader-friendlyformats for reporting information to decisionmakers and the public. These guidelines would build on the progress achieved by the ITFM and other groups, should yield significantimprovements in the nationwide consistency of data-collection activities, and should provide comparable methods and results when reporting and sharing data. The National Council http://water.us gs.gov /public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98

The Strategy forImproving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 26 of28 The ITFM sponsored 10 regional meetings during summer 1993 to review its proposals and recommendations andto discuss monitoring opportunities andproblems in the Federal regions. Additional meetings and review activities to contribute finalcomments and facilitate regional collaboration were held in 1994. In addition, Florida, Idaho, New Jersey, and Wisconsin have held statewide monitoring meetings that have included monitoring organizations andinformation users. The purpose ofthese meetings is to begin the design of statewide monitoring strategies. During the review ofthis strategy, other States, which included California, Michigan, Minnesota, and Arizona, stated they were pursuing collaborative monitoring teams of some kind. In the area of monitoring program design, the USEPA, the States, and the Tribes are using the ITFM monitoring program frameworkas the basis fordeveloping monitoring guidancefor the USEPA Section 106 grants to States and Tribes. The use of the program throughout the Nation will significantlyimprove the usefulnessof water-quality informationand the cost effectivenessof the programs (TechnicalAppendix B). Federal agencies also are redesigning monitoring programs to parallel the ITFM program concepts more closely. For example, the USGS is redesigning NASQAN to implement such monitoring concepts, as well as to respond to budget constraints. The USACE is developing guidance documents forits water-quality-monitoring program that closely parallels the ITFM recommendations. This guidancewill address water-quality-monitoring activities at hundreds ofUSACE projects nationwide. The ITFM analytical work related to indicators is a major contribution to proposed changes to the USEPA guidelines forthe States' 1996 305(b) reports. These changes are being made in consultation with representatives fromFederal, State, Tribal, and interstate agencies that conduct environmental monitoring and assessment activities. The changes to the guidelines will produce more comparable informationand will help link the information collectedmore directly to water-quality goals nationwide. Regarding the establishment of ecological referencesites and conditions, representatives fromStates, USGS/NAWQA, and USEPA/EMAP are working together to identifyand use referenceconditions characteristic of waters and associated habitats that meet desired goals. The resulting reference conditions are needed as baselines against which to compare andassess the biological integrity of aquatic systems generally. All levels of government and the private sector will be able to use the informationgenerated fromthe reference sites and conditions to make more effective regulatory and resource-management decisions. The USGS, through the NAWQA Program, hosted an interagency workshop on the biological methods used to assess the quality of streams and rivers (U.S. Geological Survey, 1994). The purposes of the workshop were to promote better communication among Federal agencies and to facilitatedata exchange and interagency collaboration. The workshop focused on community assessment methods forfish, invertebrates, and algae; characterization of physical habitats; and chemical analyses of biological tissues. The 45 biologists who attended the workshop evaluated similarities and differencesamong biological monitoring protocols and identifiedopportunities for collaboration and research, improving data compatibility, and sharing information. Conclusion Implementation of the recommendations andstrategy in this report will result in an adequate waterinformation base to achieve natural-resource-management and environmental protection goals in the public and the private sectors. Identifiedchanges are already being made, but implementation of the fullstrategy cannotbe achieved quickly. Each participating organizationwill need to revise its monitoring activities in a series of deliberate steps over several years as money and time become available. However, because benefitsfrom the changes are incremental, improvement of water-quality monitoring has begun as described in the preceding section. As the competition foradequate supplies of clean water increases, concernsabout public health and http:/!wat er. usgs.gov/public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 The Strategy for Improving Water-Quality Moni ... Page 27 of28 the environment escalate, and geographically targeted watershed-management programs increase, more demands will be placed on the water-quality-informationinfrastructure. These demands cannot be met effectivelyand economically without changing our approach to monitoring. The agencies that participated on the ITFM believe that the implementation ofthis strategy fornationwide water-quality monitoring will provide sound answers to the fundamentalquestions posed in the introduction to this report. References

Carlinand the Environmental Law Institute, 1990, Environmental Investments---The cost ofa clean environment: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA--230--11--90--083, 35 p. Gurtz, M.E., andMuir, T.A., 1994, Report ofthe Interagency Biological Methods Workshop: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94--490, 109 p. Hirsch, R.M., Alley, W.M., and Wilbur, W.G., 1988, Concepts for a National Water-Quality Assessment Program: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1021, 42 p. Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality, 1992, Ambient water-quality monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey, 51 p. ------1994a, Technical Appendixes in Water-quality monitoring in the United States---1993 report ofthe Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality: U.S. Geological Survey, January 1994, 62 p. ------1994b, Water-quality monitoring in the United States---1993 report ofthe IntergovernmentalTask Force on Monitoring Water Quality: U.S. Geological Survey, 95 p. Knopman, D.S., and Smith, R.A., 1992, Twenty years ofthe Clean Water Act---Has U.S. water quality improved: Washington, D.C., Hedref Publications, v. 35, no. 1, 41 p. Leahy, P.P., Rosenshein, J.S., and Knopman, D.S., 1990, Implementation plan for the National Water-Quality Assessment Program: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90--174, 10 p. National Research Council, 1987, National water quality monitoring and assessment: Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 110 p. ------1990a, Managing troubled water---The rate ofmarine environmental monitoring: Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 125 p. ------1990b, A review ofthe USGS national water quality assessment pilot program: Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 153 p. Soil Conservation Service, 1994, National handbook ofwater quality monitoring, in National water quality handbook: Soil Conservation Service, pt. 600, 176 p. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987, Surfacewater monitoring---A frameworkfor change: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 41 p. ------1990, Environmental investments---The costs ofa clean environment: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA--230--11--90--083, p. 4--22 and 4--23. ------1991, Monitoring guidelines to evaluate effects offorestry activitieson streams in the PacificNorthwest and Alaska: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA--910--9--91--001, 166 p. http://water.usgs.gov/public/wicp/lopez.main.html 3/6/98 APPENDIX L: Management Options Matrix

05-28-1998 02=48PM FROM STEEL HERITAGE TO 97873588 P.03

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PITTSBURGH DIS'ffllCT, CORPS CW ENGINEERS WI\.LIAM S. MOORHEAD FEDERAL BUILDING 1000 LIBERTYAVENUE PITTSBURGH, PA 1S222-4116 MPL.YTO �OF May 21, 1998

Natural and Cultural Resources Branch

;Mr. Jeremy P. Muller Steel Industry Heritage Corporation '338 East Ninth Avenue, l"f: Floor 'Homestead, Pennsylvania 15120

Dear Mr. Muller:

We have reviewed your Draft Preliminary Findings Report for ,the Monongahela River Conservation Plan which you sent to Mr. �onrad Weiser by letter dated May 1, 1998. As your report acknowledges, the Corps of Engineers is intimately involved with the Monongahela River in areas of particular concern to your potential future projects - navigation, regulatory permits, water quality, an.d flood plains. We noted, however, that .sorne :Of the reported information on our facilities and programs is not current or complete, or does not conform to our conventional nomenclature. We would like to discuss this and the potential ·tor our involvement in some of your management options prior to general public review of your report.

Please call Mr. Weiser at 412-395-7220 to arrange a meeting time and place with us.

Sincerely,

Division

TOTAL P.03 · ResourcePlannin g CoortHnator

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission P.O. Box 67000 Harrisburg,PA 17106-7000

June9, 1998

Steel Industry HeritageCorporation 338 EastNinth Street Homezt�ad, PA !5120

RE: Monongahela River ConservationPlan

Dear Sirs:

Thankyou forforwarding the Monongahela River ConservationPlan - Draft PreliminaryFindings Report to the Commissionfor review. The documentarrived in Harrisburg after the formalresponse deadline had passed, but I hope my observationsand comments will still be of some assistance to you.

Congratulations on compilingan outstandingreference resource on the Monongahela River. Thetopics covered and the depth of discussion is quite impressive. The document is well written.

The PennsylvaniaFish andBoat Commission's mission is, "to provide fishingand boating opportunities throughthe protectionand management of aquatic resources.n Our legislative mandates include promoting fishingand boating opportunities. We see the provision of boating access as akey to meeting these mandates. For thisreason, it was refreshing to see riverfrontparks, boat iaunchesand landings discussed insome dc�l in the document.

As your document shows, there arelocal and private entities interested in improving fishing,boating and outdoor recreation infrastructure,including boat ramps. The Commission would like to offerour cooperation. We would like to coordinate our programs with the Steel Industry Heritage Corporationto further our common goals and objectives.

The Commissionis particularlyinterested in ways we canhelp each other improve access to the river. The Commission is currentlydeveloping anaccess grantsprogram and a water trail program that will certainly be of interest and possibly help to you. We would Sud IndustryHuitagtt Corporation J1111tt9, 1998 Pagtt1

liketo discussthe status of these programs and develop appropriate mechanisms for cooperation if you are interested.

If you have any questions or would like to set up a meeting,please contact me at (717) 657-4394.

Sincerely,

ThomasP. Ford Resource PlanningCoordinator

TFics

cc: J. Simmons J. Young B. Kiesnoski A. Murawski BOARD OF TRUSTEES CHARLEROI COMMUNITY PARK FUND

CHARLEROI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

ONE CHAMBER PLAZA CHARLEROI, PA. 15022

July 21, 1998

Mr. Don Santoro Mackin Engineering 1 17 Industry Drive Pittsburgh, PA 15275-10 l 5

The following are comments regarding the Rivers of Steel project and should be considered as constructive.

1. Project as presented is too vast in scope and too general, as one who has exerted considerable time and efforton community projects as well as businesses, I have found the "shot-gun" approach to be a hindrance to success.

" We should be realistic, the Monongahela River does not have the "character" of a Rhine, a Mississippi, or a Hudson River.

3. The question of ownership of river frol"!t propertyhas not been addressed.

4. The question of maintaining and sustaining any facilities has not been addressed.

5. The question of responsibility and liability remains open on these proposals.

6. Presentation has not utilized previous studies forriver frontdevelopment that are more specific and detailed. IVIuch time and effort as well as fundscould have been saved by review of these studies, ZHA and Community and Economic Revitalization Program, dated August 14, 1992 by Delta Development and GAI Cconsultants for Mon Valley Progress Council.

7. Suggest concentrating on specificprojects along river as "do-able" would increase overall success of this plan.

�Trustees Commu- nitv Park ;/ �.I I 1J/ }' ,, Y7 -1L,.rv1�:_[ :-1--l { · // (1 ': fi-CA "- Ronald A. l'vfonack / Chairman

tru!--t�i.:s ri ,·t!rst. \\ p�

{ 7.::l'f) PHONES: 483-3507 and 483-3508 FL.ATIJ?.ONBUILDING fJEJU1'/1GE C'li1Y'l'Jil� 69 ,\larkc:t.'>trf!i:f /Jm11·11.wi/li:, /'A J 5,// 7 72.J-785-YJJ I i:-muiI Fl.,I T/JUJN@,l.C.',"J".\: CO,\I

August 7, 1998

Mr. Rob Hilliard Mackin Engineering Company RIDC Park West 117 Industry Drive Pittsb�rgh, PA 15275

Dear Rob, ··

Enclosed are some suggestions forthe PreliminaryFindings Report of the Monongahela River study for Steel Industry Heritage Corporation.

Have a few questions, What is the McDonald Marina at MM55.9 and the A.B. Marina at 55.4?

Please be sure to include the Brownsville Wharfin the plan, since we have made application for a grant to DCNRthrough the River Plan you completed forBrownsville.

I truly enjoyed ·reading this report. It is so fullof great information. You all did a super job! Sure am happy that our paths crossed long time ago through the effortsof Dennis when he was with your company.

Need to meet up with your boss someday and discuss Italy. We are thinking about a trip in the Spring of 2000 when my granddaughtergraduates from College.

Best wishes to all of you,

P. S. Have a letter from DCNR that the Brownsville Borough papers are all approved and the request has been submitted to the Controller for the funds due to yoµ. Hope it will be soon.