DOCSLIB.ORG

MAHANOY CREEK WATERSHED TMDL Columbia, Northumberland and Schuylkill Counties

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
MAHANOY CREEK WATERSHED TMDL Columbia, Northumberland and Schuylkill Counties MAHANOY CREEK WATERSHED TMDL Columbia, Northumberland and Schuylkill Counties Prepared for: Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection March 13, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 1 LOCATION .................................................................................................................................................... 2 SEGMENTS ADDRESSED IN THIS TMDL................................................................................................... 3 CLEAN WATER ACT REQUIREMENTS....................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 303(D) LISTING PROCESS ......................................................................................................... 4 BASIC STEPS FOR DETERMINING A TMDL ..............................................................................................5 WATERSHED BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................... 5 Permits in the Mahanoy Creek Watershed ................................................................................. 6 TMDL ENDPOINTS....................................................................................................................................... 7 TMDL ELEMENTS (WLA, LA, MOS)............................................................................................................. 7 TMDL ALLOCATIONS SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 8 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................... 14 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ........................................................................................................................... 25 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................ 26 Commenter: Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future....................................................................80 TABLES Table 1. Mahanoy Creek Segments Addressed .......................................................................... 1 Table 2. NPDES permits associated with mining permits requiring waste load allocations (WLAs) in the Mahanoy Creek Watershed .................................................................................... 6 Table 3. NPDES permits not associated with mining permits requiring waste load allocations (WLAs) in the Mahanoy Creek Watershed .................................................................................... 7 Table 3. Applicable Water Quality Criteria................................................................................ 7 Table 5. Mahanoy Creek Watershed Summary Table................................................................... 8 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A. Mahanoy Creek Watershed Maps.......................................................................27 Attachment B. Excerpts Justifying Changes Between the 1996, 1998, Draft 2000 and Draft 2002 Section 303(d) Lists ...................................................................................31 Attachment C. AMD Methodology and the pH Method.............................................................33 Attachment D. TMDLs By Segment...........................................................................................36 Attachment E. Flow Adjusted Concentration Method…………………………………………55 Attachment F. Water Quality Data Used in TMDL Calculations...............................................57 Attachment G. Iterative Aluminum Reductions for Gilberton Pump Discharge ........................77 Attachment H. Comment and Response .....................................................................................79 i TMDL1 Mahanoy Creek Watershed Columbia, Northumberland and Schuylkill Counties, Pennsylvania INTRODUCTION This Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) calculation has been prepared for segments in the Mahanoy Creek Watershed (Attachment A). It was done to address the impairments noted on the 1996, 1998, and draft 2002 Pennsylvania Section 303(d) lists and the 2000 305(b) report required under the Clean Water Act. The TMDL covers five segments on these lists (Table 1). High levels of metals, and in some areas depressed pH, caused these impairments. All impairments resulted from acid drainage from coal mining. The TMDL addresses the three primary metals (iron, manganese, and aluminum) associated with acid mine drainage (AMD) and pH. Table 1. Mahanoy Creek Segments Addressed State Water Plan (SWP) Subbasin: 06-B Susquehanna River EPA DEP Segment Stream Designated Data 305(b) Year Miles Stream Source ID Name Use Source Cause Code Code 1996 52.2 Not 17556 Mahanoy WWF 305(b) RE Metals placed on Creek Report GIS 1998 26.07 2227 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWMP AMD Metals Creek 1998 27.59 2228 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWMP AMD Metals Creek 2000 26.1 2227 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWMP AMD Metals Creek 2000 27.6 2228 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWMP AMD Metals Creek 2002 11.1 20000808- 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWAP AMD Metals 1500- Creek MAF 2002 21.6 20000810- 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWAP AMD Metals 1530- Creek MAF 2002 6.6 20010629- 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWAP AMD Metals 1230- Creek MAF 2002 12.8 20010820- 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWAP AMD Metals, 1200- Creek pH MAF 2002 2.3 20010820- 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWAP AMD Water/Flow 1201- Creek Variability, MAF pH 1 Pennsylvania’s 1996 and 1998 Section 303(d) lists were approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The 2000 Section 303(d) list was not required by USEPA. The 1996 Section 303(d) list provides the basis for measuring progress under the 1996 lawsuit settlement of American Littoral Society and Public Interest Group of Pennsylvania v. EPA. 1 State Water Plan (SWP) Subbasin: 06-B Susquehanna River EPA DEP Segment Stream Designated Data 305(b) Year Miles Stream Source ID Name Use Source Cause Code Code 2002 2 20010820- 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWAP AMD Water/ 1501- Creek Flow MAF Variability 2002 7.7 2227 17556 Mahanoy WWF SWAP AMD Metals Creek 1996 5 Not 17683 Shenandoah CWF 305(b) RE Metals placed on Creek Report GIS 1998 4.66 2240 17683 Shenandoah CWF SWMP AMD Metals Creek 2000 4.67 2240 17683 Shenandoah CWF SWMP AMD Metals Creek 2002 4.7 2240 17683 Shenandoah CWF SWAP AMD Metals Creek 1996 Not currently on 303(d) List Unt. Mahanoy Creek 1998 Not currently on 303(d) List Unt. Mahanoy Creek 2000 Not currently on 303(d) List Unt. Mahanoy Creek 2002 2.3 20010629- 17673 Unt. CWF SWAP AMD Metals, 0930- Mahanoy Siltation MAF Creek 1996 5.8 Not 17639 Zerbe Run CWF 305(b) RE Metals placed on Report GIS 1998 4.82 7087 17639 Zerbe Run CWF SWMP AMD Metals 2000 4.83 7087 17639 Zerbe Run CWF SWMP AMD Metals 2002 7.7 20000809- 17639 Zerbe Run CWF SWAP AMD Metals, 1430- pH MAF Attachment B includes a justification of differences between the 1996, 1998, draft 2000 and draft 2002 303(d) lists. WWF = Warm Water Fishes CWF = Cold Water Fishes RE = Resource Extraction AMD = Abandoned Mine Drainage SWMP = Surface Water Monitoring Program SWAP = Surface Water Assessment Program LOCATION The Mahanoy Creek Watershed is approximately 157 square miles in area. It is located in portions of Columbia, Northumberland and Schuylkill Counties, with its mouth located about 10 miles south of Sunbury, Pennsylvania. Mahanoy Creek flows 50 miles west from its headwaters near Mahanoy City, Schuylkill County, to its confluence with the Susquehanna 2 River, near Herndon, Northumberland County. Mahanoy Creek can be accessed from Interstate 81 by traveling west on State Route 901. SEGMENTS ADDRESSED IN THIS TMDL The Mahanoy Creek Watershed is affected by pollution from AMD. This pollution has caused high levels of metals in Mahanoy Creek, Shenandoah Creek, an unnamed tributary to Mahanoy Creek near Lavelle and Zerbe Run. Low pH affects Zerbe Run and Mahanoy Creek upstream of Gordon. There are numerous seeps, boreholes and tunnel discharges entering Mahanoy Creek throughout most of the watershed. The unnamed tributary to Mahanoy Creek is affected by AMD from a discharge in its headwaters. Zerbe Run is mostly affected by AMD discharges from the North Franklin Mine. Shenandoah Creek receives AMD from the abandoned Weston and Hammond Mines. CLEAN WATER ACT REQUIREMENTS Section 303(d) of the 1972 Clean Water Act requires states, territories, and authorized tribes to establish water quality standards. The water quality standards identify the uses for each waterbody and the scientific criteria needed to support that use. Uses can include designations for drinking water supply, contact recreation (swimming), and aquatic life support. Minimum goals set by the Clean Water Act require that all waters be “fishable” and “swimmable.” Additionally, the federal Clean Water Act and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) implementing regulations (40 CFR 130) require: • States to develop lists of impaired waters for which current pollution controls are not stringent enough to meet water quality standards (the list is used to determine which streams need TMDLs); • States to establish priority rankings for waters on the lists based on severity of pollution and the designated use of the waterbody; states must also identify those waters for which TMDLs will be developed and a schedule for development; • States to submit
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Conowingo Tunnel and the Anthracite Mine Flood-Control Project a Historical Perspective on a “Solution” to the Anthracite Mine Drainage Problem
    The Conowingo Tunnel and the Anthracite Mine Flood-Control Project A Historical Perspective on a “Solution” to the Anthracite Mine Drainage Problem Michael C. Korb, P.E. Environmental Program Manager Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation (BAMR) Wilkes Barre District Office [email protected] www.depweb.state.pa.us Abstract Fifty-seven years ago, Pennsylvania’s Anthracite Mine Drainage Commission recommended that the Conowingo Tunnel, an expensive, long-range solution to the Anthracite Mine Drainage problem, be “tabled” and that a cheaper, short-range “job- stimulus” project be implemented instead. Today Pennsylvania’s anthracite region has more than 40 major mine water discharges, which have a combined average flow of more than 285,000 gallons per minute (GPM). Two of these average more than 30,000 GPM, 10 more of the discharges are greater than 6,000 GPM, while another 15 average more than 1,000 GPM. Had the Conowingo Tunnel Project been completed, most of this Pennsylvania Anthracite mine water problem would have been Maryland’s mine water problem. Between 1944 and 1954, engineers of the US Bureau of Mines carried out a comprehensive study resulting in more than 25 publications on all aspects of the mine water problem. The engineering study resulted in a recommendation of a fantastic and impressive plan to allow the gravity drainage of most of the Pennsylvania anthracite mines into the estuary of the Susquehanna River, below Conowingo, Maryland, by driving a 137-mile main tunnel with several laterals into the four separate anthracite fields. The $280 million (1954 dollars) scheme was not executed, but rather a $17 million program of pump installations, ditch installation, stream bed improvement and targeted strip-pit backfilling was initiated.
    [Show full text]
  • December 20, 2003 (Pages 6197-6396)
    Pennsylvania Bulletin Volume 33 (2003) Repository 12-20-2003 December 20, 2003 (Pages 6197-6396) Pennsylvania Legislative Reference Bureau Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/pabulletin_2003 Recommended Citation Pennsylvania Legislative Reference Bureau, "December 20, 2003 (Pages 6197-6396)" (2003). Volume 33 (2003). 51. https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/pabulletin_2003/51 This December is brought to you for free and open access by the Pennsylvania Bulletin Repository at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Volume 33 (2003) by an authorized administrator of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. Volume 33 Number 51 Saturday, December 20, 2003 • Harrisburg, Pa. Pages 6197—6396 Agencies in this issue: The Governor The Courts Department of Aging Department of Agriculture Department of Banking Department of Education Department of Environmental Protection Department of General Services Department of Health Department of Labor and Industry Department of Revenue Fish and Boat Commission Independent Regulatory Review Commission Insurance Department Legislative Reference Bureau Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority Pennsylvania Municipal Retirement Board Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission Public School Employees’ Retirement Board State Board of Education State Board of Nursing State Employee’s Retirement Board State Police Detailed list of contents appears inside. PRINTED ON 100% RECYCLED PAPER Latest Pennsylvania Code Reporter (Master Transmittal Sheet): No. 349, December 2003 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Legislative Reference Bu- PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN reau, 647 Main Capitol Building, State & Third Streets, (ISSN 0162-2137) Harrisburg, Pa. 17120, under the policy supervision and direction of the Joint Committee on Documents pursuant to Part II of Title 45 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes (relating to publication and effectiveness of Com- monwealth Documents).
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Section 106 Annual Report - 2019
    Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Section 106 Annual Report - 2019 Prepared by: Cultural Resources Unit, Environmental Policy and Development Section, Bureau of Project Delivery, Highway Delivery Division, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Date: April 07, 2020 For the: Federal Highway Administration, Pennsylvania Division Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Officer Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Penn Street Bridge after rehabilitation, Reading, Pennsylvania Table of Contents A. Staffing Changes ................................................................................................... 7 B. Consultant Support ................................................................................................ 7 Appendix A: Exempted Projects List Appendix B: 106 Project Findings List Section 106 PA Annual Report for 2018 i Introduction The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) has been delegated certain responsibilities for ensuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) on federally funded highway projects. This delegation authority comes from a signed Programmatic Agreement [signed in 2010 and amended in 2017] between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and PennDOT. Stipulation X.D of the amended Programmatic Agreement (PA) requires PennDOT to prepare an annual report on activities carried out under the PA and provide it to
    [Show full text]
  • 4.3.2 Dam and Levee Failure
    Schuylkill County Hazard Mitigation Plan Month 2019 4.3.2 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE PROFILE This section discusses both the dam and levee failure hazard in Schuylkill County. Dam Failure A dam is an artificial barrier that has the ability to store water, wastewater, or liquid-borne materials for many reasons (flood control, human water supply, irrigation, livestock water supply, energy generation, containment of mine tailings, recreation, or pollution control). Many dams fulfill a combination of these stated functions (Association of State Dam Safety Officials 2013). Man-made dams can be classified according to the type of construction material used, the methods used in construction, the slope or cross-section of the dam, the way the dam resists the forces of the water pressure behind it, the means used for controlling seepage, and, occasionally, the purpose of the dam. The materials used for construction of dams include earth, rock, tailings from mining or milling, concrete, masonry, steel, timber, miscellaneous materials (plastic or rubber), and any combination of these materials (Association of State Dam Safety Officials 2013). Dams typically fail when spillway capacity is inadequate and excess flow overtops the dam, or when internal erosion (piping) through the dam or foundation occurs. Complete failure occurs if internal erosion or overtopping results in a complete structural breach, releasing a high-velocity wall of debris-filled waters that rush downstream, damaging or destroying anything in its path (Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] 2005). Dam failures can result from one or a combination of the following reasons: . Overtopping caused by floods that exceed the capacity of the dam .
    [Show full text]
  • Catawissa Creek Watershed: 303(D) Listed Streams and Municipalities
    Catawissa Creek Watershed: 303(d) Listed Streams and Municipalities MIFFLIN (2TWP) Scotch Run k ee Cr a ss wi ta Ca o T 41 75 2 ib Tr un h R k MAIN (2TWP) otc ee Sc er Run Cr Beav LL UU ZZ EE RR NN EE CC OO UU NN TT YY a iss ek aw re at C C sa is C aw ata at wi C ssa CC OO LL UU MM BB II AA CC OO UU NN TT YY Cr eek n e Ru BEAVER (2TWP) n rnac n e Ru Fu u rnac r R Fu ve un n ea R Ru B CATAWISSA (BORO) ce er a C rn eav C a a Fu B t t aw CATAWISSA (2TWP) To a Catawissa Cat w is 45 awissa Creek s 5 r Run i a 7 Fishe s C 2 s re rib a e T k C r un e R e er k ish F k n Cree Raccoo FRANKLIN (2TWP) BLACK CREEK (2TWP) un Nuremberg R ap "Long Hollow" G e in ow" T M Holl o ek Long Catawis m oaf Cre " sa Creek h Sugarl reek ic Catawissa C ke Creek en L C ick n ek k h i C re a e om t C e T t r f t r l a a T e o rib C e e rl w 27 a k 565 n k g ree To e C u i C Ca k S s ssa taw i is c r " s taw sa i w C a Cr h o llo a C ee o To k m k r H a 5 o ree nge t 756 o C 2 k n ROARING CREEK (2TWP) Stra C a rib T icke " w T e h r k Tom e d e is re e s C k a ssa R i u C aw HAZLE (2TWP) t n re Ca e sa Creek k ek LL UU ZZ EE RR NN EE CC OO UU NN TT YY f Catawis C Tomhicken Cre ib 27615 O ataw Tr issa L Legend Cr i ee t k t Cat un l awissa Klingermans R NORTH UNION (2TWP) e Creek BANKS (2TWP) T Catawissa Creek o m Towns h n i k y Ru c ee CC AA RR BB OO NN CC OO UU NN TT YY err k Cr anb e ry Cr n do T y rib 2 C k Population Crooked Run 7568 To To un mhicken r H Creek e e k MCADOO (BORO) less than 10,000 k e e r C a 10,000 to 49,999 s s i w McAdoo a t 50,000 to 99,999 a C C a t a w EAST UNION (2TWP) un i Streams ed R s rook s C a C r KLINE (2TWP) e Strahler Stream Order e SS CC HH UU YY LL KK II LL LL CC OO UU NN TT YY k Cataw 1 issa Creek un n ek R u Catawissa Cre M un 2 y R e ers R n on rk ss ess Ru St a er To M rs D s 10 se R 276 es un Trib M 3 Messers Run D .
    [Show full text]
  • Abandoned Mine Drainage Workgroup Overview
    ABANDONED MINE DRAINAGE The headwaters of the Schuylkill River are located in the serene mountain valleys of Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania. An area rich in scenic beauty and coal mining history, the Little Schuylkill and Upper Schuylkill Rivers are designated cold-water fisheries, and the Schuylkill main stem is a State Scenic River at the confluence of these two tributary waterways. Abandoned Mine Drainage (AMD) is the primary cause of pollution in the Schuylkill River headwaters and the biggest source of metals downstream. AMD is created deep below the ground in abandoned mines where streams, groundwater, and stormwater fill tunnels that were once kept dry by active pumping operations. Water and oxygen react with lingering iron sulfide (pyrite) producing metal-laden and sometimes highly acidic discharges that exit the tunnels in telltale orange and silver plumes, easily visible in these regional surface waters. Abandoned mine discharge Schuylkill PottsvillPottsville River Watershed NJ S Reading ch uy Pottstown lk ill Trenton Riv e Norri r Norristown r PA e iv Philadelphia R Camden re wa N Wilmington la e DE D W E MD S Abandoned mine tunnel AMD interferes with vegetative growth and reproduction of aquatic animals by armoring the streambed with deposits of iron and other metals. Acidity and metals impair both surface and ground drinking water resources and quickly corrode pipes and industrial mechanisms. Unattractive waterways marred by AMD can hinder tourism and recreational opportunities like fishing, boating, and swimming that attract so many people to visit, vacation, and reside in this region. Passive AMD treatment system AMD treatment is expensive, but so is the economic and environmental damage that results from untreated AMD.
    [Show full text]
  • Zerbe Township WWTP Successfully Manages Non-Dispersible Debris Impacting Its Influent Pump Station
    Case Study 01.2018 Zerbe Township WWTP Successfully Manages Non-Dispersible Debris Impacting Its Influent Pump Station Wastewater treatment plant operators, Wet-wipe consumption overall has nearly tripled in the past decade, according to Smithers Pira, a worldwide having to deal with persistent clogs authority on the packaging, paper and print industries. in pumps and check valves due to When these reinforced paper towels, cleaning cloths, baby wipes, diaper liners, feminine hygiene disposable wipes and other non- and cosmetic wipes are flushed down the toilet, dispersible debris, have had limited they ultimately reach the influent pump station at wastewater treatment plants relatively intact – clogging options for solutions that can be and jamming pumps, check valves and screens, and implemented within narrow and deep- significantly increasing the maintenance, repair and channel influent pump station wet operational costs. wells. Zerbe Township, Pennsylvania, Influent pump stations, being the headworks of wastewater treatment plants, are the first processes is one of a growing number of WWTP impacted by non-dispersible debris. If the pump operations that have successfully station has a coarse-bar screen positioned before the pumps, as with many legacy systems, some of managed this problem by installing the non-dispersible material will be captured before Gorman-Rupp Super T Series® self- reaching the pumps. But these original-equipment screens, with their 1” to 2” openings which may have priming pumps, upgraded with performed satisfactorily for decades, are now proving an innovative Eradicator® Solids inadequate at stopping the greatly increased flow of Management System. non-dispersibles, allowing this material to reach the pumps, which negatively impacts their operation, requiring more frequent shut-downs to perform clean- For decades, wastewater treatment plant operators outs, maintenance and repairs.
    [Show full text]
  • NOTICES Funds Will Be Spent to Reimburse These Qualified Land DEPARTMENT of Trusts for a Portion of Their Costs in Acquiring Agricultural Conservation Easements
    39 NOTICES funds will be spent to reimburse these qualified land DEPARTMENT OF trusts for a portion of their costs in acquiring agricultural conservation easements. AGRICULTURE The statutory language establishing the Program is Land Trust Reimbursement Grant Program essentially self-executing. The following restates the statutory procedures and standards published at 29 Pa.B. 6342, with the exception of Paragraph (8) (State Board The Department of Agriculture (Department) amends Review), which has been revised to reflect the current the procedures and standards for the Land Trust Reim- statutory authority for the Program and to delete the bursement Grant Program (Program). referenced minimum-acreage requirements. It also pro- vides references to sources of further information or These procedures and standards were originally pub- assistance. lished at 29 Pa.B. 6342 (December 18, 1999). The under- lying statutory authority for the Program has changed 1. Eligible Land Trust. To be eligible to register with since this original publication date. The original authority the State Board and to receive reimbursement grants for the Program was section 1716 of The Administrative under the Program, a land trust must be a tax-exempt Code of 1929 (71 P. S. § 456). That provision was re- institution under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Rev- pealed by the act of May 30, 2001 (P. L. 103, No. 14) (3 enue Code (26 U.S.C.A. § 501(c)(3)) and include the P. S. § 914.5), which effected a continuation of the Pro- acquisition of agricultural conservation easements or gram under the Agricultural Area Security Law (act) (3 other conservation easements in its stated purpose.
    [Show full text]
  • Geochemistry
    GEOCHEMISTRY GENERAL CONCLUSIONS As part of the watershed study, a geochemical survey was conducted to determine the condition of the streams, with respect to coal mine drainage. The geochemical characteristics of coal mine drainage as well as the chemical reactions taking place between mine discharges and receiving streams were investigated with applications of the geochemistry to abatement procedures. Analysis performed on water samples included pH, acidity, alkalinity, Ca, Mg, Na, 2+ 2- K, Al, Ni, Si, Total Fe, Fe , and S04 . Water pollution caused by coal mine drainage has destroyed or severely affected large parts of Pennsylvania. Over 3,000 miles of streams and 302,400 acres of wildlife habitat have been adversely affected by strip and surface mining as a result of coal production in the Commonwealth (5). In the Mahanoy Creek watershed alone over 84 MGD of mine drainage enters the streams resulting in deterioration of water quality throughout the watershed. BRIEF REVIEW OF COAL MINE DRAINAGE The general nature of acid mine drainage, although complex, has been well reported to date (6) (8) (9). During mining, ground-water movement as well as aquifers are disrupted, bringing subsurface waters in contact with pyritic materials in the coal and in the associated rock strata. In many cases the flow directions are so drastically changed that the mine workings are inundated forming underground mine pools and causing water to drain through numerous mine openings. By exposing the sulfuritic materials, primarily pyrite and marcasite, to air and moisture, oxidation of these minerals occurs, resulting in products such as ferric hydroxide, ferrous sulfate and sulfuric acid.
    [Show full text]
  • Luzerne County Act 167 Phase II Stormwater Management Plan
    Executive Summary Luzerne County Act 167 Phase II Stormwater Management Plan 613 Baltimore Drive, Suite 300 Wilkes-Barre, PA 18702 Voice: 570.821.1999 Fax: 570.821.1990 www.borton-lawson.com 3893 Adler Place, Suite 100 Bethlehem, PA 18017 Voice: 484.821.0470 Fax: 484.821.0474 Submitted to: Luzerne County Planning Commission 200 North River Street Wilkes-Barre, PA 18711 June 30, 2010 Project Number: 2008-2426-00 LUZERNE COUNTY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY – INTRODUCTION 1. Introduction This Stormwater Management Plan has been developed for Luzerne County, Pennsylvania to comply with the requirements of the 1978 Pennsylvania Stormwater Management Act, Act 167. This Plan is the initial county-wide Stormwater Management Plan for Luzerne County, and serves as a Plan Update for the portions or all of six (6) watershed-based previously approved Act 167 Plans including: Bowman’s Creek (portion located in Luzerne County), Lackawanna River (portion located in Luzerne County), Mill Creek, Solomon’s Creek, Toby Creek, and Wapwallopen Creek. This report is developed to document the reasoning, methodologies, and requirements necessary to implement the Plan. The Plan covers legal, engineering, and municipal government topics which, combined, form the basis for implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan. It is the responsibility of the individual municipalities located within the County to adopt this Plan and the associated Ordinance to provide a consistent methodology for the management of stormwater throughout the County. The Plan was managed and administered by the Luzerne County Planning Commission in consultation with Borton-Lawson, Inc. The Luzerne County Planning Commission Project Manager was Nancy Snee.
    [Show full text]
  • Brook Trout Outcome Management Strategy
    Brook Trout Outcome Management Strategy Introduction Brook Trout symbolize healthy waters because they rely on clean, cold stream habitat and are sensitive to rising stream temperatures, thereby serving as an aquatic version of a “canary in a coal mine”. Brook Trout are also highly prized by recreational anglers and have been designated as the state fish in many eastern states. They are an essential part of the headwater stream ecosystem, an important part of the upper watershed’s natural heritage and a valuable recreational resource. Land trusts in West Virginia, New York and Virginia have found that the possibility of restoring Brook Trout to local streams can act as a motivator for private landowners to take conservation actions, whether it is installing a fence that will exclude livestock from a waterway or putting their land under a conservation easement. The decline of Brook Trout serves as a warning about the health of local waterways and the lands draining to them. More than a century of declining Brook Trout populations has led to lost economic revenue and recreational fishing opportunities in the Bay’s headwaters. Chesapeake Bay Management Strategy: Brook Trout March 16, 2015 - DRAFT I. Goal, Outcome and Baseline This management strategy identifies approaches for achieving the following goal and outcome: Vital Habitats Goal: Restore, enhance and protect a network of land and water habitats to support fish and wildlife, and to afford other public benefits, including water quality, recreational uses and scenic value across the watershed. Brook Trout Outcome: Restore and sustain naturally reproducing Brook Trout populations in Chesapeake Bay headwater streams, with an eight percent increase in occupied habitat by 2025.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoup's Run Watershed Association
    11/1/2004 Shoup Run Watershed Restoration Plan Developed by the Huntingdon County Conservation District for The Shoup Run Watershed Association Introduction Watershed History The Shoup Run, locally known as Shoup’s Run, watershed drains approximately 13,746 acres or 21.8 square miles, in the Appalachian Mountain, Broad Top region of the Valley-Ridge Physiographic Province. Within this province, the area lies within the northwestern section of the Broad Top Mountain Plateau. This area is characterized by narrow valleys and moderately steep mountain slopes. Shoup Run is located in Huntingdon County, but includes drainage from portions of Bedford County. Shoup Run flows into the Raystown Branch of the Juniata River near the community of Saxton at river mile 42.4. Shoup Run has five named tributaries (Figure 1). Approximately 10% of the surface area of the Shoup Run basin has been surface mined. Much of the mining activity was done prior to current regulations and few of the mines were reclaimed to current specifications. Surface mining activity ended in the early 1980’s. There is currently no active mining in the watershed. Deep mines underlie approximately 12% of the Shoup Run watershed. Many abandoned deep mine entries and openings still exist in the Shoup Run Basin. Deep mining was done below the water table in many locations. In order to dewater the mines, drifts were driven into the deep mines to allow water to flow down slope and out of many of the mines. The bedrock in this area is folded and faulted. Tunnels were driven through many different lithologies to allow drainage.
    [Show full text]