DOCSLIB.ORG

Upper Guyandotte River Watershed Based Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Upper Guyandotte River Watershed Based Plan Upper Guyandotte River Watershed Based Plan February 2006 Submitted by: Upper Guyandotte Watershed Association PO Box 171 Mullens, WV 25882 304.923.4995 Acknowledgements The following agencies and organizations participated in the development of the portions of this plan which deal with fecal coliform bacteria: Upper Guyandotte Watershed Association Canaan Valley Institute WV Department of Environmental Protection Mountain Resource Conservation and Development Council West Virginia Conservation Agency Crab Orchard MacArthur Public Service District Wyoming County Commission Rural Appalachian Improvement League West Virginia Bureau for Public Health Wyoming County Health Department WV Division of Natural Resources Virginia Department of Health Southern Conservation District Beckley-Raleigh County Health Department Eastern Wyoming Public Service District WV Water Research Institute USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Region 1 Planning and Development Council The portions of this plan which deal with metals pollution were prepared by: Downstream Strategies The final Watershed Based Plan was compiled and submitted by: Upper Guyandotte Watershed Association Development of this plan was funded by a grant from: West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection i Table of Contents Table of Contents ...........................................................................................................................ii Table of Tables ..............................................................................................................................iii Table of Figures.............................................................................................................................iv 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................1 2 Nonpoint source pollution in the Upper Guyandotte (a) .....................................................6 2.1 Measurable Water Quality Goals........................................................................................9 2.2 Fecal coliform bacteria .....................................................................................................11 2.3 Metals................................................................................................................................16 3 Nonpoint source management measures (c)........................................................................23 3.1 Wastewater Treatment Systems........................................................................................23 3.2 Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation ................................................................................35 4 Estimated load reductions and costs (b)..............................................................................37 4.1 Fecal coliform bacteria .....................................................................................................37 4.2 Metals................................................................................................................................42 5 Technical and financial assistance (d) .................................................................................60 5.1 Wastewater Treatment Projects ........................................................................................60 5.2 AML Reclamation Projects...............................................................................................62 6 Implementation Schedule, Milestones, and Measurable Goals for Wastewater Treatment Projects (f, g, h)......................................................................................................................64 6.1 Prioritization Schema........................................................................................................64 6.2 Implementation Schedule..................................................................................................68 6.3 Measurable Milestones .....................................................................................................70 6.4 Water Quality Goals .........................................................................................................72 6.5 Progress Evaluation ..........................................................................................................73 7 Implementation Schedule, Milestones, and Measurable Goals for AML Projects (f, g, h)76 7.1 Prioritization Schema........................................................................................................76 7.2 Implementation Schedule..................................................................................................76 7.3 Measurable Milestones .....................................................................................................77 7.4 Water Quality Goals .........................................................................................................77 8 Monitoring (i).........................................................................................................................78 9 Education and Outreach (e) .................................................................................................79 References.....................................................................................................................................80 Appendix A. All Abandoned mine lands in the Upper Guyandotte watershed.....................82 Appendix B: Active mining operations in the Upper Guyandotte watershed .......................85 Appendix C. Load reduction calculations for fecal coliform bacteria ...................................87 Appendix D. Load reduction calculations for AMLs with water quality problems..............91 Appendix E: Cost calculations for wastewater treatment projects ........................................92 Appendix F. Cost calculations for each AML with water quality problems .........................96 D.1 Land reclamation ..............................................................................................................96 D.2 Mine seals .........................................................................................................................96 D.5 Oxic limestone channels ...................................................................................................96 D.6 Engineering and project management costs......................................................................96 Appendix G. Waters previously listed for total aluminum impairment .................................98 Appendix H: Ranking score calculations for wastewater treatment projects.......................99 ii Table of Tables Table 1: Percent land cover according to use ................................................................................. 1 Table 2: Demographics of the Upper Guyandotte watershed......................................................... 5 Table 3: Stream segments impaired by metals ............................................................................... 8 Table 4: Selected West Virginia water quality standards ............................................................... 9 Table 5: Wastewater treatment methods currently being utilized ................................................ 14 Table 6: Known and likely sources of metals pollution by subwatershed.................................... 17 Table 7: Abandoned mine lands known to discharge polluted mine drainage ............................. 19 Table 8: Bond forfeiture sites that discharge polluted mine drainage .......................................... 21 Table 9: Subwatersheds requiring manganese reductions from non-AML sources ..................... 21 Table 10: Wastewater treatment technology cost assumptions .................................................... 24 Table 11: Proposed collection system and treatment type by project area................................... 25 Table 12: Anticipated fecal coliform load reductions................................................................... 38 Table 13: Anticipated fecal coliform load reductions and TMDL required reductions ............... 40 Table 14: Wastewater treatment costs by subwatershed............................................................... 41 Table 15: Reductions required to meet TMDL targets for abandoned mine lands....................... 43 Table 16: Summary of AML remediation costs and stream miles improved............................... 44 Table 17: AMLs adding metals to the Guyandotte River 2 watershed......................................... 47 Table 18: AMLs adding metals to the Pinnacle Creek watershed................................................ 49 Table 19: AMLs adding metals to the Barker’s Creek watershed................................................ 51 Table 20: AMLs adding metals to the Slab Fork watershed......................................................... 53 Table 21: AMLs adding metals to the Devil’s Fork watershed.................................................... 55 Table 22: AMLs adding metals to the Winding Gulf watershed.................................................. 57 Table 23: AMLs adding metals to the Stonecoal Creek watershed.............................................. 59 Table 24: Tasks required for implementation of wastewater treatment projects.......................... 60 Table 25: Tasks required for implementation of AML remediation projects............................... 62 Table 26: Subwatersheds and communities
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Proposed Rule
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 01/28/2020 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2020-01012, and on govinfo.gov DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–R5–ES–2019–0098; 4500090023] RIN 1018-BE19 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Big Sandy Crayfish and the Guyandotte River Crayfish AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to designate critical habitat for the Big Sandy crayfish (Cambarus callainus) and the Guyandotte River crayfish (C. veteranus) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In total, approximately 582 stream kilometers (skm) (362 stream miles (smi)) in Martin and Pike Counties, Kentucky; Buchanan, Dickenson, and Wise Counties, Virginia; and McDowell, Mingo, and Wayne Counties, West Virginia, are proposed as critical habitat for the Big Sandy crayfish. Approximately 135 skm (84 smi) in Logan and Wyoming Counties, West Virginia, are proposed as critical habitat for the Guyandotte River crayfish. If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend the Act’s protections to these species’ critical habitat. We also announce the availability of a draft economic analysis of the proposed designation of critical habitat for these species. DATES: We will accept comments on the proposed rule or draft economic analysis (DEA) that are received or postmarked on or before [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF 1 PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • 02070001 South Branch Potomac 01605500 South Branch Potomac River at Franklin, WV 01606000 N F South Br Potomac R at Cabins, WV 01606500 So
    Appendix D Active Stream Flow Gauging Stations In West Virginia Active Stream Flow Gauging Stations In West Virginia 02070001 South Branch Potomac 01605500 South Branch Potomac River At Franklin, WV 01606000 N F South Br Potomac R At Cabins, WV 01606500 So. Branch Potomac River Nr Petersburg, WV 01606900 South Mill Creek Near Mozer, WV 01607300 Brushy Fork Near Sugar Grove, WV 01607500 So Fk So Br Potomac R At Brandywine, WV 01608000 So Fk South Branch Potomac R Nr Moorefield, WV 01608070 South Branch Potomac River Near Moorefield, WV 01608500 South Branch Potomac River Near Springfield, WV 02070002 North Branch Potomac 01595200 Stony River Near Mount Storm,WV 01595800 North Branch Potomac River At Barnum, WV 01598500 North Branch Potomac River At Luke, Md 01600000 North Branch Potomac River At Pinto, Md 01604500 Patterson Creek Near Headsville, WV 01605002 Painter Run Near Fort Ashby, WV 02070003 Cacapon-Town 01610400 Waites Run Near Wardensville, WV 01611500 Cacapon River Near Great Cacapon, WV 02070004 Conococheague-Opequon 01613020 Unnamed Trib To Warm Spr Run Nr Berkeley Spr, WV 01614000 Back Creek Near Jones Springs, WV 01616500 Opequon Creek Near Martinsburg, WV 02070007 Shenandoah 01636500 Shenandoah River At Millville, WV 05020001 Tygart Valley 03050000 Tygart Valley River Near Dailey, WV 03050500 Tygart Valley River Near Elkins, WV 03051000 Tygart Valley River At Belington, WV 03052000 Middle Fork River At Audra, WV 03052450 Buckhannon R At Buckhannon, WV 03052500 Sand Run Near Buckhannon, WV 03053500 Buckhannon River At Hall, WV 03054500 Tygart Valley River At Philippi, WV Page D 1 of D 5 Active Stream Flow Gauging Stations In West Virginia 03055500 Tygart Lake Nr Grafton, WV 03056000 Tygart Valley R At Tygart Dam Nr Grafton, WV 03056250 Three Fork Creek Nr Grafton, WV 03057000 Tygart Valley River At Colfax, WV 05020002 West Fork 03057300 West Fork River At Walkersville, WV 03057900 Stonewall Jackson Lake Near Weston, WV 03058000 West Fork R Bl Stonewall Jackson Dam Nr Weston 03058020 West Fork River At Weston, WV 03058500 W.F.
    [Show full text]
  • The Logan Plateau, a Young Physiographic Region in West Virginia, Kentucky, Virginia, and Tennessee
    The Logan Plateau, a Young Physiographic Region in West Virginia, Kentucky, Virginia, and Tennessee U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1620 . II • r ,j • • ~1 =1 i1 .. ·~ II .I '1 .ill ~ I ... ... II 'II .fi :. I !~ ...1 . ~ !,~ .,~ 'I ~ J ·-=· ..I ·~ tJ 1;1 .. II "'"l ,,'\. d • .... ·~ I 3: ... • J ·~ •• I -' -\1 - I =,. The Logan Plateau, a Young Physiographic Region in West Virginia, Kentucky, Virginia, and Tennessee By WILLIAM F. OUTERBRIDGE A highly dissected plateau with narrow valleys, steep slopes, narrow crested ridges, and landslides developed on flat-lying Pennsylvanian shales and subgraywacke sandstone during the past 1.5 million years U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1620 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1987 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Outerbridge, William F. The Logan Plateau, a young physiographic region in West Virginia, Kentucky, Virginia, and Tennessee. (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1620) Bibliography: p. 18. Supt. of Docs. no.: I 19.3:1620 1. Geomorphology-Logan Plateau. I. Title. II. Series. QE75.B9 no. 1620 557.3 s [551.4'34'0975] 84-600132 [GB566.L6] CONTENTS Abstract 1 Introduction 1 Methods of study 3 Geomorphology 4 Stratigraphy 9 Structure 11 Surficial deposits 11 Distribution of residuum 11 Depth of weathering 11 Soils 11 Landslides 11 Derivative maps of the Logan Plateau and surrounding area 12 History of drainage development since late Tertiary time 13 Summary and conclusions 17 References cited 18 PLATES [Plates are in pocket] 1.
    [Show full text]
  • A Cartographic History of Huntington, West Virginia, 1871-1903 Brooks Bryant Marshall University
    Marshall University Marshall Digital Scholar Manuscripts Library Special Collections Winter 12-13-2016 A Cartographic History of Huntington, West Virginia, 1871-1903 Brooks Bryant Marshall University Follow this and additional works at: http://mds.marshall.edu/lib_manu Part of the American Studies Commons, Appalachian Studies Commons, Other History Commons, and the Public History Commons Recommended Citation Bryant, Brooks, "A Cartographic History of Huntington, West Virginia, 1871-1903" (2016). Manuscripts. 7. http://mds.marshall.edu/lib_manu/7 This Personal Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Library Special Collections at Marshall Digital Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Manuscripts by an authorized administrator of Marshall Digital Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. ~A Cartographic History of Huntington, West Virginia, 1871-1903~ Marshall University Archives & Special Collections Brooks Bryant Marshall University, Huntington, West Virginia 2016 COPYRIGHT © 2016 The Marshall University Libraries Huntington, W.Va. www.marshall.edu ISBN: 978-0-9903359-1-7 Table of Contents Illustrations Iv Introduction V Rufus Cook Map 1-4 M. Wood White Map 5-6 Eli Hayes Map 7-10 1884 Sanborn Map 11-13 1889 Sanborn Map 14-16 1903 Huntington Land Company Map 17-19 1910 A.T. Proctor Panoramic 20-21 Conclusion 22 Bibliography 23 iii Illustrations Rufus Cook Map . 1 M. Wood White Map . .5 Eli Hays Map . .7 1884 Sanborn Map . .11 1889 Sanborn Map . .14 Huntington Land Company . 17 A.T. Proctor Panoramic . 20 Note on illustrations: To purchase high-resolution digital copies of these maps, please contact Marshall University Archives & Special Collections.
    [Show full text]
  • GILBERT BRIDGE HAER No. WV-63 U.S. Route 52» Spanning The
    GILBERT BRIDGE HAER No. WV-63 U.S. Route 52» spanning the Guyandotte River near the confluence of Gilbert Creek -\—1/^pTP Gilbert , ' Mingo County V\/V7-\ f West Virginia ^O-0:^=5^7 PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC.AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD\ National Park Service Northeast Region ^^Philadelphia Support Office --" U.S. Custom House 200 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, P.A. 19106 r HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD VWA, GILBERT BRIDGE HAERNo.WV-63 Location: U.S. Route 52, spanning the Guyandotte River near the confluence of Gilbert Creek, Gilbert, Mingo County, West Virginia. UTM: 17.423460.4163100 Quad: Gilbert, West Virginia Date of Construction: 1925 Present Owner: West Virginia Department of Transportation Division of Highways Capital Complex, Room 109, Building 5 Charleston, West Virginia 25305 Present Use: Vehicular and Pedestrian Bridge Significance: The Gilbert Bridge, which was constructed during the "Good Roads Movement" of the 1920s, allowed for the economic and geographic expansion of Gilbert, West Virginia by providing safe and convenient access to both banks of the Guyandotte River. In addition, the bridge served as a vital link in the State Road system which connected Mingo County to other counties in West Virginia. Project Information: This documentation \vas undertaken in 1995 in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement by the West Virginia Department of Transportation as a mitigative measure prior to the replacement of the bridge. Jeffrey A. Drobney Ph.D. Historic Preservation Specialist Skelly and Loy, Inc Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15146 GILBERT BRIDGE HAERNo. WV-63 (Page 2) General grjdge Description The Gilbert Bridge was built in 1925 by the Vincennes Bridge Company of Vincennes, Indiana.
    [Show full text]
  • Gazetteer of West Virginia
    Bulletin No. 233 Series F, Geography, 41 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIKECTOU A GAZETTEER OF WEST VIRGINIA I-IEISTRY G-AN3STETT WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1904 A» cl O a 3. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. DEPARTMENT OP THE INTEKIOR, UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, Washington, D. C. , March 9, 190Jh SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith, for publication as a bulletin, a gazetteer of West Virginia! Very respectfully, HENRY GANNETT, Geogwvpher. Hon. CHARLES D. WALCOTT, Director United States Geological Survey. 3 A GAZETTEER OF WEST VIRGINIA. HENRY GANNETT. DESCRIPTION OF THE STATE. The State of West Virginia was cut off from Virginia during the civil war and was admitted to the Union on June 19, 1863. As orig­ inally constituted it consisted of 48 counties; subsequently, in 1866, it was enlarged by the addition -of two counties, Berkeley and Jeffer­ son, which were also detached from Virginia. The boundaries of the State are in the highest degree irregular. Starting at Potomac River at Harpers Ferry,' the line follows the south bank of the Potomac to the Fairfax Stone, which was set to mark the headwaters of the North Branch of Potomac River; from this stone the line runs due north to Mason and Dixon's line, i. e., the southern boundary of Pennsylvania; thence it follows this line west to the southwest corner of that State, in approximate latitude 39° 43i' and longitude 80° 31', and from that corner north along the western boundary of Pennsylvania until the line intersects Ohio River; from this point the boundary runs southwest down the Ohio, on the northwestern bank, to the mouth of Big Sandy River.
    [Show full text]
  • 7Q10 Analysis Chart for Report
    Appendix K 7Q10 (Low Flow) Analysis Appendix K: 7Q10 Analysis 7Q10 MINUS AVERAGE DAILY 7Q10 DAILY DAILY MAXIMUM 7Q10 IN MINUS MAXIMUM REPORTED DECIMAL DECIMAL FACILITY NAME COUNTY POTENTIAL 7Q10 GALLONS COMMENT AVERAGE SOURCE POTENTIAL FLOW LATITUDE LONGITUDE TO PER DAY DAILY TO FROM WITHDRAW FLOW WITHDRAW SURVEY AGGREGATES QUARRY RANDOLPH 80,809 2.2870 1,478,024 1,397,215 TYGART RIVER 38.92666667 -79.90861111 ALBRIGHT POWER STATION PRESTON 248,300,000 22.5000 14,541,120 -233,758,880 1,813 14,539,307 CHEAT RIVER 39.48944444 -79.63611111 GREENBRIER RIVER AT ALDERSON WATER TREATMENT PLANT GREENBRIER 900000 12.0630 7,795,979 6,895,979 ALDERSON WV Incorrect lat. ALEX ENERGY SURFACE MINES NICHOLAS 410,400 0.0030 1,939 -408,461 and long.? TWENTY MILE CREEK 38.30027778 -81.02027778 ROBINSON FORK OF ALEX ENERGY SURFACE MINES NICHOLAS 410,400 0.0050 3,231 -407,169 42,815 -39,584 TWENTY MILE CREEK 38.32166667 -80.98194444 AMERICAN FIBER RESOURCES MARION 8,640,000 340.0000 219,732,480 211,092,480 MONONGAHELA RIVER 39.52472222 -80.12777778 EAST FORK TWELVEPOLE ARGUS ENERGY, KIAH CREEK OPERATION WAYNE 396,000 0.1920 124,084 -271,916 69,523 54,561 CREEK 38.02777778 -82.29055556 ARMSTRONG PSD FAYETTE 216,632 1,890.0000 1,221,454,080 1,221,237,448 KANAWHA RIVER BANDMILL PREPARATION PLANT LOGAN 63,000 0.1600 103,404 40,404 RUM CREEK 37.81138889 -81.87111111 BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP, INSTITUTE PLANT KANAWHA 411,120,000 1,980.0000 1,279,618,560 868,498,560 KANAWHA RIVER 38.38 -81.78 BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP, INSTITUTE PLANT KANAWHA 411,120,000 1,980.0000 1,279,618,560
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Assessment for Dam Modifications on the West Fork River Harrison County, West Virginia
    Final Environmental Assessment for Dam Modifications on the West Fork River Harrison County, West Virginia REPORT PREPARED BY: USDA NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE IN COOPERATION WITH U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE FOR THE: City of Clarksburg, WV - Clarksburg Water Board November 2010 November 2010 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DAM MODIFICATIONS ON THE WEST FORK RIVER Harrison County, West Virginia West Virginia Second Congressional District Responsible Federal Agency: United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Local Sponsor: Clarksburg Water Board Cooperating Agency: US Fish and Wildlife Service Project Location: Harrison County, West Virginia For More Information: State Conservationist USDA – Natural Resources Conservation Service 75 High Street, Room 301 Morgantown, WV 26505 Phone: (304) 284-7540 Fax: (304) 284-4839 or Project Leader West Virginia Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 694 Beverly Pike Elkins, WV 26241 Phone: 304 636 6586 Fax: (304) 636 7824 Environmental Assessment Designation: FINAL Abstract: This Final Environmental Assessment describes the anticipated effects of removing three obsolete run- of-the-river water supply dams and modification of a fourth dam with an aquatic life passage structure in the West Fork River. This project proposes to restore, to the greatest extent possible, the aquatic and ecological integrity of at least forty miles of the West Fork River and many more miles of adjoining tributaries. This project has the potential to restore more suitable habitat for as many as twenty-five species of freshwater mussels including two federally listed species. Liability to the dam’s owners, the Clarksburg Water Board, will be substantially reduced with implementation of the recommended alternative.
    [Show full text]
  • Decision Rationale Total Maximum Daily Loads for the Upper Guyandotte River Watershed, West Virginia
    Decision Rationale Total Maximum Daily Loads for the Upper Guyandotte River Watershed, West Virginia __________________________________ Catherine A. Libertz, Director Water Division Date: _________ ______________ Decision Rationale Total Maximum Daily Loads for the Upper Guyandotte River Watershed, West Virginia I. Introduction The Clean Water Act (CWA) requires a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) be developed for those waterbodies identified as impaired by a state where technology-based effluent limits and other pollution controls do not provide for the attainment of water quality standards. A TMDL establishes a target for the total load of a particular pollutant that a water body can assimilate and divides that load into wasteload allocations (WLA), given to point sources, load allocations (LAs), given to nonpoint sources and natural background, and a margin of safety (MOS), which takes into account any uncertainty. Mathematically, a TMDL is commonly expressed as an equation, shown below. 푇푀퐷퐿 = ∑푊퐿퐴푠 +∑퐿퐴푠 + 푀푂푆 This document sets forth the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III’s (EPA’s) rationale for approving 380 TMDLs submitted by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) for total iron, total selenium, and/or fecal coliform bacteria in the Upper Guyandotte River Watershed. The TMDLs were developed to address impairments of water quality standards as identified on West Virginia’s section 303(d) list of water quality- limited segments. WVDEP electronically submitted the TMDLs in its report titled Total Maximum Daily Loads for the Upper Guyandotte River Watershed West Virginia (February 2021) (hereinafter referred to as the “TMDL Report”), to EPA for final review and action on February 26, 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Cover Sheet
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA OHIO VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION, INC.; SIERRA CLUB; WEST VIRGINIA HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY, INC.; & WEST VIRGINIA RIVERS COALITION; Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. GINA MCCARTHY, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, & SHAWN M. GARVIN, Regional Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, Defendants. COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF INTRODUCTION 1. This action challenges six (6) final actions by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, its Administrator, and Regional Administrator for Region III (collectively, “EPA”), and seeks to compel Defendants to perform certain nondiscretionary duties under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq. (the “Clean Water Act” or “CWA”). 2. The challenged final actions include: a. EPA’s September 24, 2009 approval of the Total Maximum Daily Loads (“TMDLs”) for selected streams in the Upper Ohio River South Watershed (hereinafter, the “Upper Ohio South TMDLs”), submitted by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (“WVDEP”); 1 b. EPA’s September 30, 2009 approval of the TMDLs for selected streams in the Dunkard Creek Watershed (hereinafter, the “Dunkard Creek TMDLs”), submitted by the WVDEP; c. EPA’s April 23, 2012 approval of the TMDLs for selected streams in the Lower Kanawha River Watershed (hereinafter, the “Lower Kanawha River TMDLs”), submitted by WVDEP; d. EPA’s May 17, 2012 approval of the TMDLs for selected streams in the Elk River Watershed (hereinafter, the “Elk River TMDLs”), submitted by WVDEP; e. EPA’s April 2, 2014 approval of the TMDLs for selected streams in the Monongahela River Watershed (hereinafter, the “Monongahela River TMDLs”), submitted by WVDEP; and f.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of West Virginia Water-Resources Data Through
    Prepared in cooperation with the West Virginia Division of Water and Waste Management Summary of West Virginia Water-Resources Data through September 2008 By R.D. Evaldi, S.M. Ward, and J.S. White Open-File Report 2009-1199 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Ken Salazar, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2009 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. Suggested citation: Evaldi, R.D., Ward, S.M., and White, J.S., 2009, Summary of West Virginia water-resources data through September 2008: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1199, 326 p. ii Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Data Presentation ..............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wolf Creek Park and Harlem Heights Cemetery Fayette County, West Virginia
    Historic Resource Study: Wolf Creek Park and Harlem Heights Cemetery Fayette County, West Virginia prepared by: Michael E. Workman, Ph.D. Billy Joe Peyton, Ph.D. Graduate Research Assistant: Jessica Sargent-Hill Undergraduate Assistants: Rick Adkins Zachary Crouch Katelyn Damron Ashley Peggs Zane Samples Maxx Turner Alfred Williams September 27, 2019 0 Table of Contents Historic Resource Study: Industrial Heritage of Wolf Creek Park Background 2 Purpose of Study 2 Project Scope 3-5 1.0 On the Waters of Wolf Creek 5-12 2.0 The Civil War Comes to Wolf Creek 12-19 3.0 Coal: Boosterism and Land Speculation 19-24 4.0 Kay Moor and Minden: Trees Above with Coal Below 24-26 5.0 Death Trap: Parral and Stuart Shaft Mines 27-28 6.0 The Coal Boom: 1900-1930 28-34 7.0 Stonehinge: Field Work and Discussion 34-36 8.0 Conclusions: A Multi-Purpose Engineering Station 36-39 9.0 Industrial Site Recommendations 39-40 10.0 Bibliography 41-42 11.0 Measured Drawings and Photographs 43-52 Historic Resource Study: Harlem Heights Cemetery 12.0 Brief History of Harlem Heights 53-56 13.0 Harlem Heights Cemetery 57-62 14.0 Harlem Heights Cemetery Recommendations 63-64 15.0 Graves in Harlem Heights Cemetery 65-151 16.0 Bibliography 152-156 1 Historic Resource Study: Industrial Heritage of Wolf Creek Park Fayette County, West Virginia Background Wolf Creek Park is a 1,059.75-acre multi-purpose development area located between Fayetteville and Oak Hill in Fayette County, West Virginia. It is situated on a plateau drained by Wolf Creek and its tributaries.
    [Show full text]