USEPA Approved IR 303D Co

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

USEPA Approved IR 303D Co 2016 West Virginia Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report Prepared to fulfill the requirements of Section 303(d) and 305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act and Chapter 22, Article 11, Section 28 of the West Virginia Water Pollution Control Act for the period of July 2014 through June 2016. Prepared by the Division of Water and Waste Management Jim Justice Governor Austin Caperton Cabinet Secretary Department of Environmental Protection Scott G. Mandirola Director Division of Water and Waste Management 2016 WV Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Water Quality Standards ............................................................................................ 2 3.0 Surface Water Monitoring and Assessment ................................................................. 4 3.1 Streams and Rivers ......................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Probabilistic (Random) Sampling ...................................................................................... 5 3.3 Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Network ....................................................................... 5 3.4 Targeted Monitoring ........................................................................................................ 7 3.5 Pre-Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Development Monitoring ......................................... 7 3.6 Lakes and Reservoirs ....................................................................................................... 7 3.7 Wetlands ........................................................................................................................ 8 3.8 Citizen Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 9 4.0 Assessed Data ........................................................................................................ 10 5.0 Use Assessment Procedures .................................................................................... 11 5.1 Numeric Water Quality Criteria ....................................................................................... 11 5.2 Segmentation of Streams ............................................................................................... 12 5.3 Evaluation of Continuous Monitoring Data ....................................................................... 13 5.4 Evaluation of Fecal Coliform Numeric Criteria ................................................................... 13 5.5 Evaluation of Ohio River – Total Iron Aquatic Life Standards ............................................. 15 5.6 Narrative Water Quality Criteria – Biological Impairment Data ........................................... 15 5.7 Narrative Water Quality Criteria - Fish Tissue and Consumption Advisories ......................... 16 5.8 Narrative Water Quality Criteria - Algal Blooms ................................................................ 18 6.0 Assessment Results ................................................................................................. 19 6.1 Streams ....................................................................................................................... 19 6.2 Lakes ........................................................................................................................... 20 6.3 Causes for Impairment .................................................................................................. 23 7.0 Probabilistic Data Summary ..................................................................................... 23 7.1 Indicators of Stream Condition ....................................................................................... 25 7.1.1 Biological Community ................................................................................................................ 25 7.1.2 Water Quality Indicators of Aquatic Integrity .............................................................................. 28 7.1.3 Habitat Indicators of Aquatic Integrity ........................................................................................ 34 8.0 Interstate Water Coordination .................................................................................. 39 8.1 Virginia DEQ on Bluestone River PCB monitoring and TMDL development .......................... 39 8.2 Virginia DEQ on New River PCB TMDL development ......................................................... 40 8.3 Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission – ORSANCO ............................................. 40 8.4 Chesapeake Bay ............................................................................................................ 40 8.5 Interstate Commission on Potomac River Basin ................................................................ 41 9.0 Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Development Process .......................................... 41 10.0 Water Pollution Control Programs............................................................................. 43 10.1 Division of Water and Waste Management ...................................................................... 43 i 2016 WV Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report 10.2 National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program .................................... 43 10.3 Nonpoint Source Control Program ................................................................................... 44 10.4 Groundwater Program ................................................................................................... 45 10.5 Division of Mining and Reclamation ................................................................................. 46 11.0 Cost Benefit Analysis ............................................................................................... 47 11.1 Funding for Water Quality Improvements ........................................................................ 47 11.2 Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program ..................................................................... 47 11.3 Low Interest Loan Program ............................................................................................ 47 11.4 Agriculture Water Quality Loan Program .......................................................................... 48 11.5 Onsite Systems Loan Program ........................................................................................ 48 12.0 Public Participation and Responsiveness Summary .................................................... 48 13.0 List Supplements Overview ...................................................................................... 53 WV 2014 Section 303(d) List Key ....................................................................................... 55 List Format .............................................................................................................................. 55 Designated Uses ...................................................................................................................... 56 Abbreviations and Acronyms ..................................................................................................... 57 List of Tables Table 1: Integrated Report Categories for West Virginia Waters ....................................................1 Table 2: West Virginia Water Use Designations ............................................................................3 Table 3: Current and Future Monitoring Activities .........................................................................9 Table 4: Data contributors for the 2016 303(d) List and Integrated Report ................................... 10 Table 5: Numeric water quality decision rationale for listing of impaired waters. ........................... 12 Table 6: 2016 Category Summary for West Virginia Streams ....................................................... 19 Table 7: 2016 Category Summary for West Virginia Lakes ........................................................... 21 Table 8: Designated use support summary for West Virginia streams. .......................................... 22 Table 9: Designated use support summary for West Virginia lakes. .............................................. 22 Table 10: Summary of impairment causes for West Virginia streams. ........................................... 23 Table 11: Summary of impairment causes for West Virginia lakes ................................................ 23 Table 12: DEP TMDL Development............................................................................................ 42 Table 13. Participants in WV River Action Network Campaign ...................................................... 49 ii 2016 WV Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report List of Figures Figure 1: West Virginia Watershed Framework Groupings .............................................................2 Figure 2: West Virginia Ambient Monitoring Sites .........................................................................6 Figure 3: West Virginia Ecoregions ............................................................................................ 24 Figure 4: West Virginia Basins .................................................................................................. 25 Figure 5: Biological
Recommended publications
  • ABSTRACT ROBINSON, JASON LESLEY. Discontinuities in Fish Assemblages and Efficacy of Thermal Restoration in Toxaway River, NC
    ABSTRACT ROBINSON, JASON LESLEY. Discontinuities in fish assemblages and efficacy of thermal restoration in Toxaway River, NC (Under the direction of Peter S. Rand) Biogeographical studies in the Toxaway and Horsepasture Rivers, (Transylvania County, NC) were initiated along with the creation of a state park in the area. This region is noted for extreme topographic relief, high annual rainfall totals and many rare and endemic plants and animals. The study area encompasses a portion of the Blue Ridge Escarpment and the associated Brevard Fault Zone. These geologic features are important factors in determining the distribution of stream habitats and organisms. I hypothesize that major waterfalls and cascade complexes have acted to discourage invasion and colonization by fishes from downstream. This hypothesis is supported by longitudinal fish assemblage patterns in study streams. Fish species richness in Toxaway River increased from 4 to 23 between Lake Toxaway and Lake Jocassee, a distance of 10 river kilometers. No species replacement was observed in the study area, but additions of up to 7 species were observed in assemblages below specific waterfalls. A second component of the research examines the efficacy of a rapid bioassessment procedure in detecting thermal and biological changes associated with a reservoir mitigation project in an upstream site on Toxaway River. The mitigation project began in the winter of 2000 with the installation of a hypolimnetic siphon to augment the overflow release with cooler water during summer months. I record a greater summer temperature difference on Toxaway River below Lake Toxaway (comparison of pre- vs. post-manipulation), relative to control sites.
    [Show full text]
  • NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5
    NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5 DATABASE DESIGN DOCUMENTATION AND DATA DICTIONARY 1 June 2013 Prepared for: United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21403 Prepared By: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Prepared for United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, MD 21403 By Jacqueline Johnson Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin To receive additional copies of the report please call or write: The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 301-984-1908 Funds to support the document The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.0; Database Design Documentation And Data Dictionary was supported by the US Environmental Protection Agency Grant CB- CBxxxxxxxxxx-x Disclaimer The opinion expressed are those of the authors and should not be construed as representing the U.S. Government, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the several states or the signatories or Commissioners to the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia or the District of Columbia. ii The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.5 TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Barry Mackintosh Park History Program National Park Service
    GEORGE WASHINGTON MEMORIAL PARKWAY ADMINISTRATIVE HISTORY Barry Mackintosh Park History Program National Park Service Department of the Interior Washington, DC 1996 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . 1 I. THE MOUNT VERNON MEMORIAL HIGHWAY • • • 7 II. THE CAPPER-CRAMTON ACT 21 III. EXPANDING THE PARKWAY, 1931-1952 • 33 IV. EXPANDING THE PARKWAY, 1952-1970 57 V. THE UNFINISHED PARKWAY. 87 VI. ARLINGTON HOUSE .•• . • 117 VII. THEODORE ROOSEVELT ISLAND . • 133 VIII. OTHER ADDITIONS AND SUBTRACTIONS • . • • . 147 Fort Hunt •.. • • . • • . • • . 147 Jones Point . • • . • • . • . • • . • • . • • • . 150 Dyke Marsh and Daingerfield Island . • • • . • • . • 153 Arlington Memorial Bridge, Memorial Drive, and Columbia Island • . • • • • • • . • • • • . • . • 164 The Nevius Tract • • . • . • • • • • • • . • • • . • • • 176 Merrywood and the Riverfront Above Chain Bridge • • • . 184 Fort Marcy . • • • • . • • • • . • • . • • • . 187 The Langley Tract and Turkey Run Farm • • • • . • • • 188 Glen Echo Park and Clara Barton National Historic site • 190 GWMP Loses Ground • • • . • • • • .. • . • • . • • • 197 INTRODUCTION The George Washington Memorial Parkway is among the most complex and unusual units of the national park system. The GWMP encompasses some 7,428 acres in Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. For reasons that will later be explained, a small part of this acreage is not administered by its superintendent, and a greater amount of land formerly within GWMP now lies within another national park unit. Some of the GWMP acreage the superintendent administers is commonly known by other names, like Great Falls Park in Virginia and Glen Echo Park in Maryland. While most national park units may be characterized as predominantly natural, historical, or recreational, GWMP comprises such a diverse array of natural, historic, and recreational resources that it defies any such categorization. Further complicating matters, GWMP's superintendent also administers four other areas classed as discrete national park units-Arlington House, The Robert E.
    [Show full text]
  • 15A Ncac 02B .0100-.0300
    NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Division of Water Resources Administrative Code Section: 15A NCAC 02B .0100: Procedures for Assignment of Water Quality Standards 15A NCAC 02B .0200: Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to Surface Waters and Wetlands of North Carolina 15A NCAC 02B .0300: Assignment of Stream Classifications Amended Effective: November 1, 2019 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA This document available at: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/csrrb/tri_rev_17to19/15A_NCAC_02B_.0100- .0300.pdf SUBCHAPTER 02B - SURFACE WATER AND WETLAND STANDARDS SECTION .0100 - PROCEDURES FOR ASSIGNMENT OF WATER QUALITY STANDARDS 15A NCAC 02B .0101 GENERAL PROCEDURES (a) The rules contained in Sections .0100, .0200 and .0300 of this Subchapter, which pertain to the series of classifications and water quality standards, shall be known as the "Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the Surface Waters and Wetlands of North Carolina." (b) The Environmental Management Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission), prior to classifying and assigning standards of water quality to any waters of the State, shall proceed as follows: (1) The Commission, or its designee, shall determine waters to be studied for the purpose of classification and assignment of water quality standards on the basis of user requests, petitions, or the identification of existing or attainable water uses, as defined by Rule .0202 of this Subchapter, not presently included in the water classification. (2) In determining the best usage of waters and assigning classifications of such waters, the Commission shall consider the criteria specified in G.S. 143-214.1(d). In determining whether to revise a designated best usage for waters through a revision to the classifications, the Commission shall follow the requirements of 40 CFR 131.10 which is incorporated by reference including subsequent amendments and editions.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish River Scenic Byway
    Fish River Scenic Byway State Route 11 Aroostook County Corridor Management Plan St. John Valley Region of Northern Maine Prepared by: Prepared by: December 2006 Northern Maine Development Commission 11 West Presque Isle Road, PO Box 779 ­ Caribou, Maine 04736 Phone: (207) 498­8736 Toll Free in Maine: (800) 427­8736 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary ...............................................................................................................................................................3 Why This Byway?...................................................................................................................................................5 Importance of the Byway ...................................................................................................................................5 What’s it Like?...............................................................................................................................................6 Historic and Cultural Resources .....................................................................................................................9 Recreational Resources ............................................................................................................................... 10 A Vision for the Fish River Scenic Byway Corridor................................................................................................ 15 Goals, Objectives and Strategies.........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • West Virginia Section 303(D) List and Supplements
    West Virginia Section 303(d) List and Supplements uunnamednnamed ttributaryributary ooff Elk-twoElk-two MMileile CCreekreek iinn KKanawhaanawha CCountyounty PPhotohoto bbyy PPatat CCampbellampbell The format of the 2004 Section 303(d) list is organized around the Watershed Management Framework. The fi ve hydrologic groups (A-E) of the framework provide the skeleton. Within each hydrologic group, watersheds are arranged alphabetically and impaired waters are sorted by stream code in their appropriate watershed. The information that follows each impaired stream includes the stream code, the affected water quality criteria, the affected designated use, the general cause of the impairment (where known), the impaired length (or, by default, the entire length), the planned or last possible timing of TMDL development and whether or not the stream was on the 2002 list. The cause of impairment is often unknown or uncertain at the time of listing and is so indicated on the list. The cause(s) of impairment and the contributing sources of pollution will be identifi ed in the TMDL development process. Many waters are listed, by default, for their entire length. In most cases, it is doubtful that the entire length of stream is impaired, but without further data, the exact length of impairment is unknown. Each listed stream will be revisited prior to TMDL development. The additional assessments performed in the pre-TMDL monitoring effort will better defi ne the impaired length. A West Virginia Watershed Management Framework map is provided to assist navigation within the list. A key is also provided to aid in the interpretation of presented information.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulatory Guide 1.59 Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants
    Revision 2 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION August 1077 C, REGULATORYGUIDE OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT REGULATORY GUIDE 1.59 DESIGN BASIS FLOODS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES Comments Ohould be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, US. Nuclear Regu latory Commision. Washington, D.C. 2055, Attention: Docketing and Service Regulatory Guides or* ihsed to describe and make available to the public methods Branch. acceptable to the NRC staff of Implementing specific parts of the Commission's regulations, to delineate techniques used by the staff in evaluating specific problems The gluides e issued in the following ten broad divisions: at postulated accidents. or to provide guidance to applicants. Regulatory Guides are not sub•titute& for regulations, and compliance with them ia not required. 1. Power Reactors 6. Products Methods and solutions different from those mt out in the guides will be accept 2. Research and Test Reactors 7. Transportation 3. Fuels end Materials Facilities S. Occupational Health able if they provide a basis for the findings requisite to the issuance or continuance 4. Environmental end Siting 9. Antitrust Review of a permit or license by the Commission. S. Materials nd Plant Protection 10. General Comments and suggestions for Improvements In these guides erai ncounrged at ll Requests for single copies of issued guides (which may be reproduced) or for place timnes. end guides will be revised, as appropriale. to accommnodate comments and ment on an automatic distribution list for single copies of future guides in specific to reflect new information or experience. This guide was revised as a result of divisions should be made in writing to the US.
    [Show full text]
  • Pittsburgh NWP 12 Combined
    PASPGP-5 PERMIT COMPLIANCE, SELF-CERTIFICATION FORM Project Name: Applicant Name: PADEP Permit No: Date of Issuance: Corps Permit Number: Date of Issuance: Waterway: County: In accordance with the compliance certification condition of your PASPGP-5 authorization, you are required to complete and sign this certification form and return it to the appropriate Corps of Engineers District in which the work is located. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Philadelphia District Baltimore District Pittsburgh District Regulatory Branch 1631 South Atherton Street Regulatory Branch Wanamaker Building Suite 101 Federal Building, 20th Floor 100 Penn Square East State College, PA 16801-6260 1000 Liberty Avenue Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390 Pittsburgh, PA 15222-4186 Please note that the permitted activity is subject to compliance inspections by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers representatives. As a condition of this permit, failure to return this notification form, provide the required information below, or to perform the authorized work in compliance with the permit, can result in suspension, modification or revocation of your authorization in accordance with 33 CFR Part 325.7 and/or administrative, civil, and/or criminal penalties, in accordance with 33 CFR part 326. Please provide the following information: 1. Date authorized work commenced: ________________________________________________ 2. Date authorized work completed: ________________________________________________ 3. Was all work, including any required mitigation, completed in accordance with your PASPGP-5 authorization? YES NO 4. Explain any deviations (use additional sheets if necessary) ____________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ 5. Was compensatory wetland/stream mitigation accomplished through an approved Mitigation Bank and/or In-Lieu fee program? YES NO (if YES, attach proof of transaction, if NO complete Number 6 and 7 below).
    [Show full text]
  • Program Overview
    WWeett WWaaddeerrss aanndd BBeeyyoonndd TThhee CCoonnddiittiioonn ooff OOuurr SSttaattee’’ss WWaatteerrss AA CCiittiizzeenn’’ss PPeerrssppeeccttiivvee 1 WV Department of Environmental Protection Division of Water and Waste Management, Nonpoint Section 601 57th Street, SE Charleston, WV 25304 The document was prepared by Tim Craddock, WV DEP’s Citizens’ Monitoring Coordinator and is available electronically in Portable Document Format (PDF). To request your copy send e-mail to Tim Craddock at: [email protected]. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Color photographs provided by: Alana Hartman, DEP’s Potomac Basin Coordinator; Abby Chappel, WV River Network; Sherry Evasic, Blue Heron Environmental Network; Neil Gillies, Cacapon Institute; Suzanne Hubbard, The Mountain Institute; Renee Cain, Lower West Fork Watershed Association; Martin Christ, Friends of Deckers Creek; Bobby Bonnett, Heizer-Manila Watershed Organization; Diana Green, Davis Creek Watershed Association; James Grey, Morris Creek Watershed Association; Larry Orr, Kanawha Valley Chapter of Trout Unlimited; Valerie Wilson, Science Teacher, Oak Hill Catholic Center; Brad Durst, WV Conservation Agency and Curtis Canada, Upper Guyandotte Watershed Association. WV Save Our Streams would like to recognize all the volunteer monitors, not only those directly associated with the program, but any others who have given their time and energy in an effort to protect our state’s streams and rivers. WV Save Our Streams would also like to recognize all of the agency and other partners who have provided assistance of any kind, to help guide volunteers through the myriad of processes involved with water quality issues. “Perception is not acquired by formal education, nor is it reserved for persons learned in the arts or sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Army Letterhead
    DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HUNTINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 502 EIGHTH STREET HUNTINGTON, WEST VIRGINIA 25701-2070 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF December 22, 2017 Regulatory Division Energy Resource Branch LRH-2015-592-GBR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NO. 12 VERIFICATION Mr. Shawn Posey Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC 555 Southepointe Boulevard, Suite 200 Canonsburg, Pennsylvania 15317 Dear Mr. Posey: I refer to the Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC’s request received on February 25, 2016 with an updated application received on February 17, 2017 and additional information received December 18, 2017 requesting a Department of the Army (DA) authorization to discharge dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States (U.S.) in association with the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) Project. The proposed project will involve the construction of a 304-mile 42-inch natural gas pipeline in Virginia and West Virginia. The MVP pipeline will cross the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Pittsburgh, Norfolk and Huntington Districts regulatory boundaries. Approximately 164-miles of the proposed pipeline, approximately 132-miles of proposed access roads, and three (3) compressor stations are located within the Huntington District’s regulatory boundary in Monroe, Summers, Greenbrier, Nicholas, Webster, Braxton, Lewis, Harrison, and Wetzel Counties, West Virginia. The project has been assigned the following file number: LRH-2015-592-GBR. Please reference this number on all future correspondence related to this proposed project. The Corps’ authority to regulate waters of the United States is based on the definitions and limits of jurisdiction contained in 33 CFR 328 and 33 CFR 329. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Section 404) requires a DA permit be obtained prior to discharging dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands.
    [Show full text]
  • Corridor Analysis for the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail in Northern Virginia
    Corridor Analysis For The Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail In Northern Virginia June 2011 Acknowledgements The Northern Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC) wishes to acknowledge the following individuals for their contributions to this report: Don Briggs, Superintendent of the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail for the National Park Service; Liz Cronauer, Fairfax County Park Authority; Mike DePue, Prince William Park Authority; Bill Ference, City of Leesburg Park Director; Yon Lambert, City of Alexandria Department of Transportation; Ursula Lemanski, Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program for the National Park Service; Mark Novak, Loudoun County Park Authority; Patti Pakkala, Prince William County Park Authority; Kate Rudacille, Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority; Jennifer Wampler, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation; and Greg Weiler, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The report is an NVRC staff product, supported with funds provided through a cooperative agreement with the National Capital Region National Park Service. Any assessments, conclusions, or recommendations contained in this report represent the results of the NVRC staff’s technical investigation and do not represent policy positions of the Northern Virginia Regional Commission unless so stated in an adopted resolution of said Commission. The views expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the jurisdictions, the National Park Service, or any of its sub agencies. Funding for this report was through a cooperative agreement with The National Park Service Report prepared by: Debbie Spiliotopoulos, Senior Environmental Planner Northern Virginia Regional Commission with assistance from Samantha Kinzer, Environmental Planner The Northern Virginia Regional Commission 3060 Williams Drive, Suite 510 Fairfax, VA 22031 703.642.0700 www.novaregion.org Page 2 Northern Virginia Regional Commission As of May 2011 Chairman Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nationwide Rivers Inventory APPENDIX National System Components, Study Rivers and Physiographic Maps
    The Nationwide Rivers Inventory APPENDIX National System Components, Study Rivers and Physiographic Maps The National Park Service United States Department of the Interior Washington, DC 20240 January 1982 III. Existing Components of the National System 1981 National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Components State Alaska 1 _ ** River Name County(s)* Segment Reach Agency Contact Description (mile1s) (s) Designation State Congressional Section(s) Length Date of District(s) Managing Physiographic Agency Alagnak River including AK I&W The Alagnak from 67 12/2/80 NPS National Park Service Nonvianuk Kukaklek Lake to West 540 West 5th Avenue boundary of T13S, R43W Anchorage, AK 99501 and the entire Nonvianuk River. Alntna River AK B.R. The main stem within the 83 12/2/80 NPS National Park Service Gates of the Arctic 540 West 5th Avenue National Park and Preserve. Anchorage, AK 99501 Andreafsky River and AK I614- Segment from its source, 262 12/2/80 FWS Fish and Wildlife Service East Fork including all headwaters 1011 E. Tudor and the East Fork, within Anchorage, AK 99503 the boundary of the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge. AK All of the river 69 12/2/80 NPS National Park Service Aniakchak River P.M. including its major 540 West 5th Avenue including: Hidden Creek tributaries, Hidden Creek, Anchorage, AK 99501 Mystery Creek, Albert Mystery Creek, Albert Johnson Creek, North Fork Johnson Creek, and North Aniakchak River Fork Aniakchak River, within the Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve. *Alaska is organized by boroughs. If a river is in or partially in a borough, it is noted.
    [Show full text]