DOCSLIB.ORG

Download Proposed Regulation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Download Proposed Regulation This space for use by IRRC H f7 .-I""* -*- i t. , ^ ^ (1) Agency Department of Environmental Protection 2m mm ?}mm (2) I.D. Number (Governor's Office Use) #7-366 IRRC Number: J?9BQ> (3) Short Title Stream Redesignations, Class A Wild Trout Waters (4) PA Code Cite (5) Agency Contacts & Telephone Numbers 25 PA Code, Chapter 93 Primary Contact: Sharon F. Trostle, 783-1303 Secondary Contact: Edward R. Brezina, 787-9637 (6) Type of Rulemaking (Check One) (7) Is a 120-Day Emergency Certification Attached? x Proposed Rulemaking X No Final Order Adopting Regulation Yes: By the Attorney General Final Order, Proposed Rulemaking Omitted Yes: By the Governor (8) Briefly explain the regulation in clear and nontechnical language This proposed rulemaking modifies Chapter 93 to reflect the recommended redesignation of a number of streams that are designated as Class A Wild Trout Waters by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC). Class A Waters qualify for designation as High Quality Waters (HQ) under §§ 93.4b(a)(2)(ii). The changes provide the appropriate designated use to these streams to protect existing uses. These changes may, upon implementation, result in more stringent treatment requirements for new and/or expanded wastewater discharges to the streams in order to protect the existing and designated water uses. (9) State the statutory authority for the regulation and any relevant state or federal court decisions. These proposed amendments are made under the authority of the following acts: The Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law, Act of June 22, 1937 (P.L. 1987, No 394) as amended, 35 P.S/S 691.5 etseq. Section 1920-A of the Administrative Code of 1929, 71 P.S. § 510-20. 40 CFR §131.32 Page 1 of8 (10) Is the regulation mandated by any federal or state law or court order, or federal regulation? If yes, cite the specific law, case or regulation, and any deadlines for action* Although this regulation is not specifically mandated by Federal or state law or regulations, Section 303(c) of the federal Clean Water Act requires that states review their water quality standards and modify them, as appropriate, at least once every three years. This regulation is undertaken as part of the Department's ongoing review of Pennsylvania's water quality standards. There are no deadlines for action associated with the regulation. However, until this regulation is adopted, it will be difficult to ensure that the Department is providing the appropriate designated uses of these streams. (11) Explain the compelling public interest that justifies the regulation. What is the problem it addresses? These regulations are needed to provide the appropriate designated use protection for the streams being revised to mirror the existing use. These amendments will minimize the risk of being under-protective, which could lead to jeopardizing the uses and continued availability of these aquatic resources. (12) State the public health, safety, environmental or general welfare risks associated with non- regulation. Retaining the current designations in the stream listings promotes water quality standards that may be under-protective of the existing uses of these aquatic resources. Being under-protective jeopardizes the continued availability of these aquatic resources. (13) Describe who will benefit from the regulation. (Quantify the benefits as completely as possible and approximate the number of people who will benefit) The citizens of the Commonwealth will benefit from these revisions to the designated uses, which will further promote continued availability of these aquatic resources. Maintenance of existing water quality in streams redesigjiated HQ will ensure the continued preservation of these sensitive ecosystems. Page 2 of8 (14) Describe who will be adversely affected by the regulation. (Quantify the adverse effect as completely as possible and approximate the number of people who will be adversely affected.) The streams that are proposed for redesignation are already protected at their existing use, and therefore the designated use changes will have no impact on treatment requirements. Persons proposing new or expanded activities or projects which result in discharges to these and/or other waters of the Commonwealth are required to provide effluent treatment according to the water quality criteria associated with the amendments to the stream uses. This regulation will be implemented through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) since the stream use designation is a major basis for determining allowable stream discharge effluent limitations. (15) List the persons, groups or entities that will be required to comply with the regulation. (Approximate the number of people who will be required to comply.) See Question #14. Persons proposing new or expanded activities or projects which result in discharges to these waters of the Commonwealth must comply with this regulation by providing the appropriate level of wastewater treatment for the discharges to these waters. (16) Describe the communications with and inputs from the public in the development and drafting of the regulation. List the persons and/or groups who where involved, if applicable. There will be a public comment period of at least 45 days to receive comments, suggestions or objections to this proposal. Public meetings and/or hearings will be scheduled if needed to receive additional comments or suggestions on specific recommendations in this proposal. (17) Provide a specific estimate of the cost and/or savings to the regulated community associated with compliance, including any legal, accounting or consulting procedures which may be required. The streams proposed for redesignation are already protected at their existing use, and therefore the designated use revisions will have no impact on treatment requirements. This regulation may, upon implementation, affect new and expanded dischargers of wastewater to these streams. Dischargers planning to add new, or expand existing discharges to streams redesignated HQ may experience higher treatment costs. The increased costs may take the form of higher engineering, construction or operating costs for wastewater treatment facilities. It is not possible to precisely predict the actual change in costs since these are site-specific and depend upon the size of the receiving stream and many other factors. L Page 3 of8 (18) Provide a specific estimate of the cost and/or savings to local governments associated with compliance, including any legal, accounting or consulting procedures which may be required. See Question 17, No costs will be imposed directly upon local governments by this regulation. However, there may, upon implementation, be additional indirect costs incurred by local governments that may take the form of engineering and consulting fees needed to review and possibly revise existing Act 537 Sewage Facilities Plans and local ordinances. (19) Provide a specific estimate of the cost and/or savings to state government associated with the implementation of the regulation, including any legal, accounting or consulting procedures which may be required. See Question 17 and 18. This proposal is based on, and will be implemented through, existing Department programs, procedures and policies. There are no additional implementation costs associated with this regulation. Page 4 of8 •6 (20) In the table below, provide an estimate of the fiscal savings and cost associated with implementation and compliance for the regulated community, local government, and iitate government for the current year and five subsequent years. Current FY FY+l FY+2 FY+3 FY+4 FY+5 Year Year Year Year Year Year SAVINGS: $ $ $ $ $ $ Regulated Community Not Measurable Local Government tf State Governments •i Total Savings if COSTS: Regulated Community Not Measurable Local Government it State Governments i» Total Cost if REVENUE LOSSES: Regulated Community Not Measurable Local Government it State Governments ft Total Revenue Losses ff (20a) Explain how the cost estimates listed above were derived. Not Applicable Page 5 of8 (20b) Provide the]last three year expenditure history for programs affected by the regulation. Program FY-3 FY-2 FY-1 Current FY Water Quality 16,704,886 16,605,573 18,741,606 15,995,084 Management (21) Using the cost-benefit information provided above, explain how the benefits of the regulation outweigh the adverse effects and cost Although it is not possible to approximate the change in costs, the Department believes that the benefits of providing the appropriate level of designated use protection and continued maintenance and availability of the Commonwealth's aquatic resources outweigh the potential costs or adverse effects of this proposal. (22) Describe the non-regulatory alternatives considered and the cost associated with those alternatives. Provide the reasons for their dismissal. There were no non-regulatory alternatives available to consider in this case. (23) Describe alternative regulatory schemes considered and the cost associated with those schemes. Provide the reasons for their dismissal. There were no alternative regulatory schemes available to consider in order to apply the appropriate designated use in 25 Pa. Code, Chapter 93, Water Oualitv Standards to mirror the existing uses of these aquatic resources. Page 6 of8 (24) Are there any provisions that are more stringent than federal standards? If yes, identify the specific provisions and the compelling Pennsylvania interest that demands stronger regulations. No, the proposed amendments
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reader's Guide to the Pennsylvania Bulletin and The
    Volume 48 Number 6 Saturday, February 10, 2018 • Harrisburg, PA Pages 847—966 Agencies in this issue The General Assembly The Courts Department of the Auditor General Department of Banking and Securities Department of Environmental Protection Department of Health Department of Human Services Environmental Quality Board Independent Regulatory Review Commission Insurance Department Joint Committee on Documents Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission State Board of Nursing State Board of Social Workers, Marriage and Family Therapists and Professional Counselors Detailed list of contents appears inside. Latest Pennsylvania Code Reporter (Master Transmittal Sheet): Pennsylvania Bulletin Pennsylvania No. 519, February 2018 TYPE OR PRINT LEGIBLY Attn: 800 Church Rd. W. 17055-3198 PA Mechanicsburg, FRY COMMUNICATIONS, INC. COMMUNICATIONS, FRY CUT ON DOTTED LINES AND ENCLOSE IN AN ENVELOPE CHANGE NOTICE/NEW SUBSCRIPTION If information on mailing label is incorrect, please email changes to [email protected] or mail to: mail or [email protected] to changes email please incorrect, is label mailing on information If (City) (State) (Zip Code) label) mailing on name above number digit (6 NUMBER CUSTOMER NAME INDIVIDUAL OF NAME—TITLE OFFICE ADDRESS (Number and Street) (City) (State) (Zip The Pennsylvania Bulletin is published weekly by Fry PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN Communications, Inc. for the Commonwealth of Pennsylva- nia, Legislative Reference Bureau, 641 Main Capitol Build- (ISSN 0162-2137) ing, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120, under the policy supervision and direction of the Joint Committee on Docu- ments under 4 Pa.C.S. Part II (relating to publication and effectiveness of Commonwealth documents). The subscrip- tion rate is $82.00 per year, postpaid to points in the United States.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Susquehanna Riyer Drainage Basin
    'M, General Hydrographic Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 109 Series -j Investigations, 13 .N, Water Power, 9 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIRECTOR HYDROGRAPHY OF THE SUSQUEHANNA RIYER DRAINAGE BASIN BY JOHN C. HOYT AND ROBERT H. ANDERSON WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1 9 0 5 CONTENTS. Page. Letter of transmittaL_.__.______.____.__..__.___._______.._.__..__..__... 7 Introduction......---..-.-..-.--.-.-----............_-........--._.----.- 9 Acknowledgments -..___.______.._.___.________________.____.___--_----.. 9 Description of drainage area......--..--..--.....-_....-....-....-....--.- 10 General features- -----_.____._.__..__._.___._..__-____.__-__---------- 10 Susquehanna River below West Branch ___...______-_--__.------_.--. 19 Susquehanna River above West Branch .............................. 21 West Branch ....................................................... 23 Navigation .--..........._-..........-....................-...---..-....- 24 Measurements of flow..................-.....-..-.---......-.-..---...... 25 Susquehanna River at Binghamton, N. Y_-..---...-.-...----.....-..- 25 Ghenango River at Binghamton, N. Y................................ 34 Susquehanna River at Wilkesbarre, Pa......_............-...----_--. 43 Susquehanna River at Danville, Pa..........._..................._... 56 West Branch at Williamsport, Pa .._.................--...--....- _ - - 67 West Branch at Allenwood, Pa.....-........-...-.._.---.---.-..-.-.. 84 Juniata River at Newport, Pa...-----......--....-...-....--..-..---.-
    [Show full text]
  • RULES and REGULATIONS Title 25—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION [25 PA
    1226 RULES AND REGULATIONS Title 25—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION [25 PA. CODE CH. 93] Corrective Amendment to 25 Pa. Code § 93.9j The Department of Environmental Protection (Department) has discovered a discrepancy between the agency text of 25 Pa. Code § 93.9j (relating to Drainage List J) as deposited with the Legislative Reference Bureau (Bureau) and published at 32 Pa.B. 4695, 4699 (September 28, 2002) and the official text as published in the Pennsylvania Code Reporter (Master Transmittal Sheet No. 337, December 2002), and as currently appearing in the Pennsylvania Code. When the amendments made by the Department at 32 Pa.B. 4695 were codified, an entry for the Lackawanna River in Luzerne County and an unnamed tributary to it were never deleted as proposed. Therefore, under 45 Pa.C.S. § 901: The Department has deposited with the Bureau a corrective amendment to 25 Pa. Code § 93.9j. The corrective amendment to 25 Pa. Code § 93.9j is effective as of December 7, 2002, the date the defective official text was announced in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. The correct version of 25 Pa. Code § 93.9j appears in Annex A, with ellipses referring to the existing text of the regulation. Annex A TITLE 25. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PART I. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Subpart C. PROTECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES ARTICLE II. WATER RESOURCES CHAPTER 93. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS § 93.9j. Drainage List J. Susquehanna River Basin in Pennsylvania Lackawanna River Exceptions Water Uses To Specific Stream Zone County
    [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]
  • FEM-FRAMS Fingal East Meath Flood Risk Assessment and Management Study
    FEM-FRAMS Fingal East Meath Flood Risk Assessment and Management Study Appropriate Assessment Stage 2: Statement for Appropriate Assessment October 2011 Fingal East Meath Flood Risk Assessment and Management Study Appropriate Assessment, Stage 2: Statement for Appropriate Assessment Contents amendment record Issue Revision Description Date Signed 1 0 First issue June 2011 LB 2 0 Revised to address client September 2011 LB comments Halcrow Barry has prepared this report in accordance with the instructions of Fingal County Council, Meath County Council and the OPW for their sole and specific use. Any other persons who use any information contained herein do so at their own risk. Halcrow Barry Tramway House, 32 Dartry Road, Dublin 6, Ireland Tel +353 1 4975716 Fax +353 1 4975716 www.halcrow.com www.jbbarry.ie © Halcrow Barry, Fingal County Council, Meath County Council & Office of Public Works, 2011 i Fingal East Meath Flood Risk Assessment and Management Study Appropriate Assessment, Stage 2: Statement for Appropriate Assessment Acknowledgements In 2008, Fingal County Council (FCC), Meath County Council (MCC) and the Office of Public Works (OPW) commenced work on a Flood Risk Assessment and Management Study (FRAM Study) for the Fingal and East Meath area, as a means of addressing existing flood risk in the study area and the potential for significant increases in this risk in the future. The Fingal East Meath Flood Risk Assessment Management Study (FEM FRAMS) was one of four pilot CFRAM studies for the new Flood Risk Assessment and Management Programme. The CFRAM studies are the core of the delivery of the new Flood Policy adopted by the Irish Government in 2004, shifting the emphasis in addressing flood risk towards a catchment-based, pro-active approach for identifying and managing existing, and potential future, flood risk’.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Pennsylvania Summary of Fishing Regulations and Laws PERMITS, MULTI-YEAR LICENSES, BUTTONS
    2018PENNSYLVANIA FISHING SUMMARY Summary of Fishing Regulations and Laws 2018 Fishing License BUTTON WHAT’s NeW FOR 2018 l Addition to Panfish Enhancement Waters–page 15 l Changes to Misc. Regulations–page 16 l Changes to Stocked Trout Waters–pages 22-29 www.PaBestFishing.com Multi-Year Fishing Licenses–page 5 18 Southeastern Regular Opening Day 2 TROUT OPENERS Counties March 31 AND April 14 for Trout Statewide www.GoneFishingPa.com Use the following contacts for answers to your questions or better yet, go onlinePFBC to the LOCATION PFBC S/TABLE OF CONTENTS website (www.fishandboat.com) for a wealth of information about fishing and boating. THANK YOU FOR MORE INFORMATION: for the purchase STATE HEADQUARTERS CENTRE REGION OFFICE FISHING LICENSES: 1601 Elmerton Avenue 595 East Rolling Ridge Drive Phone: (877) 707-4085 of your fishing P.O. Box 67000 Bellefonte, PA 16823 Harrisburg, PA 17106-7000 Phone: (814) 359-5110 BOAT REGISTRATION/TITLING: license! Phone: (866) 262-8734 Phone: (717) 705-7800 Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. The mission of the Pennsylvania Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday PUBLICATIONS: Fish and Boat Commission is to Monday through Friday BOATING SAFETY Phone: (717) 705-7835 protect, conserve, and enhance the PFBC WEBSITE: Commonwealth’s aquatic resources EDUCATION COURSES FOLLOW US: www.fishandboat.com Phone: (888) 723-4741 and provide fishing and boating www.fishandboat.com/socialmedia opportunities. REGION OFFICES: LAW ENFORCEMENT/EDUCATION Contents Contact Law Enforcement for information about regulations and fishing and boating opportunities. Contact Education for information about fishing and boating programs and boating safety education.
    [Show full text]
  • Addendum to the Catawissa Creek Restoration Plan
    Catawissa Creek Watershed Restoration Plan Update Addressing the TMDL Identification and Summary of Problem and Pollution Sources The Catawissa Creek watershed is a very rural, relatively remote, largely forested watershed, with little agricultural land. The only urbanized area is the Borough of Catawissa, at the mouth of Catawissa Creek. Ringtown Borough, in the upper Little Catawissa Creek watershed, is the only other incorporated municipality in the watershed. Several small villages are scattered through the watershed. Little new development exists in watershed except for Eagle Rock Resort, a development of mostly second and retirement homes in the upper Tomhicken Creek watershed. Farms consist of mostly pasture, with the few row crops planted mostly in corn. Impairment of Water Quality and Aquatic Life The major pollution source in the Catawissa Creek watershed is abandoned mine drainage from five deep mine tunnels located in the upper third of the watershed. A total of 44.5 miles of Catawissa Creek watershed, 11 miles of Tomhicken Creek, and 3.4 miles of Sugarloaf Creek are listed as impaired by metals from abandoned mine drainage on the DEP 303d list of impaired waters. The DEP North Central Regional Office completed the assessment of the entire Catawissa Creek watershed through the DEP Unassessed Waters Program in fall 2004. In addition to the areas already listed as impaired by abandoned mine drainage, several tributaries originating on Catawissa Mountain in the lower watershed were determined to be impaired by acid deposition and will be placed on the 303d list. This is not surprising since nearly the entire watershed is lowly buffered and slightly acidic.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Trout Waters (Natural Reproduction) - September 2021
    Pennsylvania Wild Trout Waters (Natural Reproduction) - September 2021 Length County of Mouth Water Trib To Wild Trout Limits Lower Limit Lat Lower Limit Lon (miles) Adams Birch Run Long Pine Run Reservoir Headwaters to Mouth 39.950279 -77.444443 3.82 Adams Hayes Run East Branch Antietam Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.815808 -77.458243 2.18 Adams Hosack Run Conococheague Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.914780 -77.467522 2.90 Adams Knob Run Birch Run Headwaters to Mouth 39.950970 -77.444183 1.82 Adams Latimore Creek Bermudian Creek Headwaters to Mouth 40.003613 -77.061386 7.00 Adams Little Marsh Creek Marsh Creek Headwaters dnst to T-315 39.842220 -77.372780 3.80 Adams Long Pine Run Conococheague Creek Headwaters to Long Pine Run Reservoir 39.942501 -77.455559 2.13 Adams Marsh Creek Out of State Headwaters dnst to SR0030 39.853802 -77.288300 11.12 Adams McDowells Run Carbaugh Run Headwaters to Mouth 39.876610 -77.448990 1.03 Adams Opossum Creek Conewago Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.931667 -77.185555 12.10 Adams Stillhouse Run Conococheague Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.915470 -77.467575 1.28 Adams Toms Creek Out of State Headwaters to Miney Branch 39.736532 -77.369041 8.95 Adams UNT to Little Marsh Creek (RM 4.86) Little Marsh Creek Headwaters to Orchard Road 39.876125 -77.384117 1.31 Allegheny Allegheny River Ohio River Headwater dnst to conf Reed Run 41.751389 -78.107498 21.80 Allegheny Kilbuck Run Ohio River Headwaters to UNT at RM 1.25 40.516388 -80.131668 5.17 Allegheny Little Sewickley Creek Ohio River Headwaters to Mouth 40.554253 -80.206802
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix – Priority Brook Trout Subwatersheds Within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
    Appendix – Priority Brook Trout Subwatersheds within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Appendix Table I. Subwatersheds within the Chesapeake Bay watershed that have a priority score ≥ 0.79. HUC 12 Priority HUC 12 Code HUC 12 Name Score Classification 020501060202 Millstone Creek-Schrader Creek 0.86 Intact 020501061302 Upper Bowman Creek 0.87 Intact 020501070401 Little Nescopeck Creek-Nescopeck Creek 0.83 Intact 020501070501 Headwaters Huntington Creek 0.97 Intact 020501070502 Kitchen Creek 0.92 Intact 020501070701 East Branch Fishing Creek 0.86 Intact 020501070702 West Branch Fishing Creek 0.98 Intact 020502010504 Cold Stream 0.89 Intact 020502010505 Sixmile Run 0.94 Reduced 020502010602 Gifford Run-Mosquito Creek 0.88 Reduced 020502010702 Trout Run 0.88 Intact 020502010704 Deer Creek 0.87 Reduced 020502010710 Sterling Run 0.91 Reduced 020502010711 Birch Island Run 1.24 Intact 020502010712 Lower Three Runs-West Branch Susquehanna River 0.99 Intact 020502020102 Sinnemahoning Portage Creek-Driftwood Branch Sinnemahoning Creek 1.03 Intact 020502020203 North Creek 1.06 Reduced 020502020204 West Creek 1.19 Intact 020502020205 Hunts Run 0.99 Intact 020502020206 Sterling Run 1.15 Reduced 020502020301 Upper Bennett Branch Sinnemahoning Creek 1.07 Intact 020502020302 Kersey Run 0.84 Intact 020502020303 Laurel Run 0.93 Reduced 020502020306 Spring Run 1.13 Intact 020502020310 Hicks Run 0.94 Reduced 020502020311 Mix Run 1.19 Intact 020502020312 Lower Bennett Branch Sinnemahoning Creek 1.13 Intact 020502020403 Upper First Fork Sinnemahoning Creek 0.96
    [Show full text]
  • Trib Strategy Cover
    CHESAPEAKE BAY TRIBUTARY STRATEGY PLAN Nutrient and Sediment Reduction Activities for Cambria and Indiana Counties Prepared by the Cambria County Conservation District February 2005 “The Bay starts here!” Table of Contents Page I. Introduction / Background Information 1 A. County Description 1 Demographics 1 Watershed Map (Figure 1) 2 Geology / Soils 3 Land Use 3 Land Use Map (Figure 2) 4 Natural / Recreational Resources 5 Fisheries 5 DEP Chapter 93 EV and HQ Stream Listings 6 B. Forest Management 7 C. Trends of Significance to Water Quality 8 Agriculture Specific 8 Other significant sediment and nutrient sources 8 Water Quality 8 D. Sediment and Nutrient Reductions 9 E. Water Resources / Quality 9 F. Future Needs (By Watershed) 10 Clearfield Creek Watershed 10 Chest Creek Watershed 19 West Branch of the Susquehanna River Watershed 22 II. Tributary Strategy 26 Planned Actions 26 Resources Needed 29 Expected Results of Implemented Actions 30 Expected Results Summary Table 32 Reductions needed beyond 2010 Table 33 III. Plan Development Process 34 Plan Development Meeting List 34 IV. List of References 36 V. Appendix MOU with the Indiana County Conservation District Letters of Support Cambria County Conservation District Chesapeake Bay Tributary Strategy I. INTRODUCTION A. County Description (Bay Portion) Demographics The Clearfield Creek Watershed encompasses 161.63 mi2 or 103,442.93acres (Figure 1.) in Cambria County and has an approximate population size of 16,500. The watershed contains 13 municipalities of which most are rural. The land use characteristics are mainly mining and farming both livestock and cash crop. In the headwaters, the dairy industry is predominant, while the middle and confluence sections, are influenced by mining.
    [Show full text]