DOCSLIB.ORG

2002 305(B) Report to Congress On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2002 305(B) Report to Congress On 2004 305(b) Report The Status of Water Quality in Tennessee Division of Water Pollution Control Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation 2004 305(b) Report The Status of Water Quality in Tennessee August 2004 Prepared by: Gregory M. Denton Kimberly J. Sparks Deborah H. Arnwine Linda K. Cartwright Geo-Indexing of Water Quality Information by: Richard E. Cochran Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Division of Water Pollution Control 401 Church Street L&C Annex, 6th Floor Nashville, Tennessee 37243-1534 615-532-0625 Table of Contents Section I – 2004 305(b) Report Page Introduction……………………………………………………………. 1 Chapter 1 - Water Quality Assessment Process……………………………………. 5 Chapter 2 - Water Quality Standards Attainment Status…………………………… 27 Chapter 3 - Causes of Water Pollution …………………………………………….. 35 Chapter 4 - Sources of Water Pollution …………………………………………… 47 Chapter 5 - Posted Streams, Rivers, and Reservoirs ………………………………. 60 Chapter 6 - Special Projects ……………………………………………………….. 72 Chapter 7 - Public Participation …………………………………………………… 75 Literature Cited………………………………………………………... 79 Section II – Detailed Watershed Information Page Watershed Name (HUC Code) Conasauga River Watershed (TN03150101)…………….……………………………. 85 Barren River Watershed (TN05110002)………………...………………….………… 86 Clear Fork Watershed (TN05130101)…………………...……………………………. 87 Upper Cumberland River Watershed (TN05130103)………….……………………… 88 South Fork Cumberland River Watershed (TN05130104)…….……………………… 89 Obey River Watershed (TN05130105)…………………..……………………………. 90 Cordell Hull Reservoir Watershed (TN05130106)……...……………………………. 91 Collins River Watershed (TN05130107)………………...……………………………. 92 Caney Fork River Watershed (TN05130108)…………...……………………………. 93 Old Hickory Reservoir Watershed (TN05130201)……...……………………………. 94 Cheatham Reservoir Watershed (TN05130202)………...……………………………. 95 Stones River Watershed (TN05130203)………………………………………………. 96 Harpeth River Watershed (TN05130204)……………….……………………………. 97 Barkley Reservoir Watershed (TN05130205)…………...……………………………. 98 Red River Watershed (TN05130206)…………………………………………………. 99 North Fork Holston River Watershed (TN06010101)…...…………………………… 100 South Fork Holston River Watershed (TN06010102)…..……………………………. 101 Watauga River Watershed (TN06010103)……………………………………………. 102 Holston River Watershed (TN06010104)……………….……………………………. 103 Upper French Broad River Watershed (TN06010105)….……………………………. 104 Pigeon River Watershed (TN06010106)………………...……………………………. 105 Lower French Broad Watershed (TN06010107)………...……………………………. 106 Nolichucky River Watershed (TN06010108)…………………………………………. 107 Upper Tennessee River Watershed (TN06010201)…………………………………… 108 Little Tennessee River Watershed (TN06010204)……………………………………. 109 Upper Clinch River Watershed (TN06010205)………….……………………………. 110 Table of Contents Continued Watershed Name (HUC Code) Page Powell River Watershed (TN06010206)………………………………….…………... 111 Lower Clinch River Watershed (TN06010207)………………………………………. 112 Emory River Watershed (TN06010208)………………...……………………………. 113 Lower Tennessee River Watershed (TN06020001)……..……………………………. 114 Hiwassee River Watershed (TN06020002)……………...……………………………. 115 Ocoee River Watershed (TN06020003)………………………………………………. 116 Sequatchie River Watershed (TN06020004)…………….……………………………. 117 Guntersville Reservoir Watershed (TN06030001)……………………………………. 118 Wheeler Reservoir Watershed (TN06030002)…………..……………………………. 119 Upper Elk River Watershed (TN06030003…………………………………………… 120 Lower Elk River Watershed (TN06030004)…………….……………………………. 121 Pickwick Reservoir Watershed (TN06030005)………….……………………………. 122 Upper Kentucky Reservoir Watershed (TN06040001)….……………………………. 123 Upper Duck River Watershed (TN06040002)…………...……………………………. 124 Lower Duck River Watershed (TN06040003)…………..……………………………. 125 Buffalo River Watershed (TN06040004)………………..……………………………. 126 Lower Kentucky Reservoir Watershed (TN06040005)….……………………………. 127 Mississippi River Watershed (TN08010100)…………………………………………. 128 Lower Obion River Watershed (TN08010202)………….……………………………. 129 South Fork Obion River Watershed (TN08010203)…….……………………………. 130 North Fork Forked Deer River Watershed (TN08010204)....………………………… 131 South Fork Forked Deer River Watershed (TN08010205)..…………………………. 132 Forked Deer River Watershed (TN08010206)…………..……………………………. 133 Upper Hatchie River Watershed (TN08010207)………...……………………………. 134 Lower Hatchie River Watershed (TN08010208)………..……………………………. 135 Loosahatchie River Watershed (TN08010209)………….……………………………. 136 Wolf River Watershed (TN08010210)…………………..……………………………. 137 Nonconnah Creek Watershed (TN08010211)…………….…………………………... 138 List of Tables: Page Table 1: Antidegradation Categories……………………………………………….. 9 Table 2: Outstanding National Resource Waters….……………………………….. 10 Table 3: Watershed Groups and Monitoring Schedule……………………………... 13 Table 4: Agency Data Submitted to the Division for Consideration in the 2004 Assessment Process………………………………………………………. 16 Table 5: Category Classifications…………………………………………………... 27 Table 6: Assessed Stream Miles……………………………………………………. 28 Table 7: Individual Classified Use Support for Rivers and Streams……………….. 29 Table 8: Assessed Reservoir and Lake Acres……………….……………………… 31 Table 9: Individual Classified Use Support for Reservoirs and Reelfoot Lake…….. 33 Table 10: Causes of Impairment in Assessed Rivers and Reservoirs………………... 46 Table 11: Sources of Pollution in Rivers and Reservoirs……………………………. 48 Table 12: Bacteriological Advisories in Tennessee………………………………….. 62 Table 13: Fish Tissue Advisories in Tennessee……………………………………… 69 List of Figures: Page Figure 1: Watershed Cycle Monitoring Groups…………………………………….. 11 Figure 2: Watershed Cycle………………………………………………………….. 12 Figure 3: Percent of Rivers and Streams Miles Monitored…………………………. 25 Figure 4: Percent of Reservoir and Lake Acres Monitored………………………… 25 Figure 5: Percent of Rivers and Streams in Each Category………………………… 28 Figure 6: Percent Use Support in Rivers and Streams……………………………… 29 Figure 7: Percent Use Support for Individual Classified Uses in Assessed Rivers and Streams……………………………………………………………….. 30 Figure 8: Percent of Reservoir and Lake Acres in Each Category…………..……... 32 Figure 9: Percent Use Support in Reservoirs (including Reelfoot Lake)…………… 32 Figure 10: Percent Use Support for Individual Uses in Assessed Reservoirs and Reelfoot Lake……….…………………………………………………….. 33 Figure 11: Relative Impacts of Pollution in Assessed Rivers and Streams………….. 35 Figure 12: Relative Impacts of Pollution in Assessed Reservoirs (including Reelfoot Lake)……………………………………………………………………… 42 Figure 13: Percent Contribution of Pollution Sources in Assessed River and Streams 47 Figure 14: Sources of Agricultural Pollution in Assessed Rivers and Streams……… 50 Figure 15: Sources of Habitat Alterations in Assessed Rivers and Streams…………. 52 Figure 16: Percent Contribution of Pollution Sources in Assessed Reservoirs (including Reelfoot Lake)………………………………………………… 57 Figure 17: Sources of Legacy Pollutants in Reservoirs (including Reelfoot Lake)….. 58 Figure 18: Percent Contribution of Stream Miles Posted for Pathogen Contamination…………………………………………………………….. 61 Figure 19: Percent Contribution of Reservoir Acres Posted for Fish Tissue Contamination…………………………………………………………..… 65 Figure 20: Percent Contribution of Stream Miles Posted for Fish Tissue Contamination…………………………………………………………….. 65 Figure 21: TDEC Environmental Field Office Boundaries………………….………. 78 Figure 22: Watersheds of Tennessee………………………………………………… 82 Section I – 2004 305(b) Report Status of Water Quality in Tennessee Introduction to Tennessee’s Water Quality This report was prepared by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), Division of Water Pollution Control, to fulfill the requirements of both federal and state laws. Section 305(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act requires a biennial analysis of water quality in the state. The Tennessee Water Quality Control Act also requires that the Division produce an annual report on the status of water quality. Acknowledgements The Planning and Standards Section of the Division of Water Pollution Control produced this report in cooperation with regional field office staff. The Director of the Division is Paul E. Davis and the Deputy Director is Garland P. Wiggins. The information compiled in this 2004 water quality assessment document included data provided by many state and federal agencies. These agencies include Tennessee Department of Health, Tennessee Valley Authority, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Geological Survey, and U.S. Department of Interior Office of Surface Mining. The Division is grateful for their assistance and cooperation. The authors would like to express appreciation to the Water Pollution Control staff of TDEC’s regional Environmental Field Offices (EFOs) and the Aquatic Biology staff of the Tennessee Department of Health (TDH) who collected the stream, river, and reservoir data documented in this report. The managers of the staff in these offices are: Terry Templeton Memphis EFO Pat Patrick Jackson EFO Joe Holland Nashville EFO Dick Urban Chattanooga EFO Paul Schmierbach Knoxville EFO Andrew Tolley Johnson City EFO Tim Wilder Columbia EFO Fran Baker Cookeville EFO David Stucki Aquatic Biology, TDH Cover Photo: Little Pigeon River in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Photo provided by David Duhl. Requirements of the Clean Water Act According to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly called the Clean Water
Load more

Recommended publications
  • For Siltation and Habitat Alteration in the Nolichucky River
    TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL) For Siltation and Habitat Alteration In The Nolichucky River Watershed (HUC 06010108) Cocke, Greene, Hamblen, Hawkins, Jefferson, Unicoi, and Washington, Counties, Tennessee FINAL (Modified) Prepared by: Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Division of Water Pollution Control 6th Floor L & C Tower 401 Church Street Nashville, TN 37243-1534 April 18, 2008 Approved by: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV February 26, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 WATERSHED DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................... 1 3.0 PROBLEM DEFINITION .................................................................................................... 5 4.0 TARGET IDENTIFICATION ............................................................................................. 33 5.0 WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT AND DEVIATION FROM TARGET ......................... 36 6.0 SOURCE ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................ 36 6.1 Point Sources ............................................................................................................... 38 6.2 Nonpoint Sources ......................................................................................................... 45 7.0 DEVELOPMENT OF TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS ..............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 27/Friday, February 8, 2002/Notices
    Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2002 / Notices 6021 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY final EIS. Recirculation of the available on the Internet at: document is not necessary under www.efw.bpa.gov Federal Energy Regulatory Section 1506.3(c) of the Council on EIS No. 020050, DRAFT FINAL EIS, Commission Environmental Quality Regulations. FHW, WY, Wyoming Forest Highway [Docket Nos. EC02–5–000, ER02–211–000, EIS No. 020044, DRAFT 23 Project, Louis Lake Road also and EL02–53–000] SUPPLEMENTS, FRC, WA, Condit known as Forest Development Road Hydroelectric (No. 2342) Project, 300, Improvements from Bruce’s Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Updated Information on Application Parking Lot to Worthen Meadow Corporation, Entergy Nuclear Vermont to Amend the Current License to Road, Funding, NPDES Permits and Yankee, LLC, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Extend the License Term to October 1, COE Section 404 Permit, Shoshone Power Corporation; Notice of Initiation 2006, White Salmon River, Skamania National Forest, Fremont County, WY, of Proceeding and Refund Effective and Klickitat Counties, WA, Comment Wait Period Ends: March 11, 2002, Date Period Ends: March 25, 2002, Contact: Contact: Rick Cushing (303) 716– Nicholas Jayjack (202) 219–2825. This 2138. February 4, 2002. document is available on the Internet Take notice that on February 1, 2002, at: http://www.ferc.gov EIS No. 020051, REVISED DRAFT EIS, the Commission issued an order in the EIS No. 020045, FINAL EIS, FHW, NM, FHW, WA, WA–509 Corridor above-indicated dockets initiating a US 70 Corridor Improvement, Completion/I–5/South Access Road proceeding in Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • Nolichucky Reservoir Land Management Plan
    Document Type: EIS-Administrative Record Index Field: Final Environmental Document Project Name: Douglas and Nolichucky Tributary Reservoirs Land Management Plan Project Number: 2008-30 DOUGLAS-NOLICHUCKY TRIBUTARY RESERVOIRS LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT VOLUME III Nolichucky Reservoir PREPARED BY: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY AUGUST 2010 For information, contact: Tennessee Valley Authority Holston-Cherokee-Douglas Watershed Team 3726 E. Morris Boulevard Morristown, Tennessee 37813 Phone: (423) 585-2123 Fax: (423) 585-2151 Page intentionally blank Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... III-1 1.1. Background ............................................................................................................................ III-1 1.2. Purpose .................................................................................................................................. III-2 2.0 PLANNING PROCESS .......................................................................................................... III-5 2.1. Planning Goals ..................................................................................................................... III-11 2.2. Allocation Process ............................................................................................................... III-11 2.3. Committed Land ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seismic Design of the Kentucky Lake and Lake Barkley Approach Spans
    SEISMIC DESIGN BIOGRAPHY SUMMARY OF THE Brad is a Principal with Palmer New bridges over Kentucky KENTUCKY LAKE Engineering Company and Lake and Lake Barkley are in works in the Winchester, Ken- the United States’ most seismi- AND LAKE tucky office. He has a BSCE cally active area in the East, the BARKLEY from the University of Cincin- New Madrid Seismic Zone. Basket handle arches were cho- nati, an MSCE from the Univer- APPROACH sen for the navigation spans SPANS sity of Colorado, and a PhD with more than a mile of ap- from the University of Ken- proach spans crossing the lakes. tucky. His wife finally said Because these structures will enough and made him get a real serve as a main route for evacu- job. ations and first responders, the David Rust is a Project Manag- Kentucky Transportation Cabi- net (KYTC) designated them er with Palmer Engineering also "essential" for seismic design. in the Winchester office. He To remain functional after a earned a BSCE from the Uni- large earthquake, site-specific versity of Cincinnati and an hazard analyses, extensive field MSCE from the University of testing, and site-specific re- Kentucky. David is Engineer of sponse analyses provided com- Record on the Lake Barkley ap- prehensive input for structural proach spans. design. Response spectrum BRAD ROBSON analyses with linear foundation Kyle McLemore is a Structural models were used in prelimi- Engineer in the Nashville office nary design to screen numerous of Palmer Engineering. He approach span arrangements holds a BSCE from the Univer- and narrow to viable alternates.
    [Show full text]
  • Scanned Document
    2 NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE BEFORE 12:00 o’clock noon EST on the day the President’s Budget is presented to Congress DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS – CIVIL WORKS FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET REQUEST The Fiscal Year 2010 Budget provides $5,125,000,000 for the Civil Works program of the Army Corps of Engineers. The Civil Works program supports water resources development, management, and restoration through investigations and surveys, engineering and design, construction, and operation and maintenance, as authorized by Congress. Funding for the Civil Works program includes $464,000,000 in additional new resources, including $369,000,000 in non-Federal contributions. Based on current estimates, requested FY 2010 appropriations and additional new resources are as follows: Amount ($) Requested Appropriations: Investigations 100,000,000 Construction 1,718,000,000 1/ Operation and Maintenance 2,504,000,000 2/ Regulatory Program 190,000,000 Mississippi River and Tributaries 248,000,000 Expenses 184,000,000 Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies 41,000,000 Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program 134,000,000 Assistant Secretary of the Army, Civil Works 6,000,000 TOTAL APPROPRIATION REQUEST 5,125,000,000 Sources of Appropriations: General Fund (4,204,000,000) Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (793,000,000) Inland Waterways Trust Fund (85,000,000) Special Recreation User Fees (43,000,000) TOTAL APPROPRIATION REQUEST (5,125,000,000) Additional New Resources: Rivers and Harbors Contributed Funds 369,000,000 3/ Coastal Wetlands Restoration Trust Fund 86,000,000 4/ Permanent Appropriations 9,000,000 TOTAL ADDITIONAL NEW RESOURCES 464,000,000 TOTAL PROGRAM FUNDING 5,589,000,000 1/ Includes $85,000,000 from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
    [Show full text]
  • TENNESSEE RIVER BASIN RESERVOIRS in TENNESSEE RIVER BASIN 03468500 DOUGLAS LAKE.--Lat 35O57'40", Long 83O32'20", Sevie
    358 TENNESSEE RIVER BASIN RESERVOIRS IN TENNESSEE RIVER BASIN 03468500 DOUGLAS LAKE.--Lat 35o57'40", long 83o32'20", Sevier County, Hydrologic Unit 06010107, at Douglas Dam on French Broad River, 6.5 mi north of Sevierville, and at mile 32.3. DRAINAGE AREA, 4,541 mi2. PERIOD OF RECORD, February 1943 to current year. GAGE,water-stage recorder. Datum of gage is sea level. REMARKS.--Reservoir formed by concrete main dam and 10 saddle dams. Spillway equipped with 11 radial gates, each 32 ft high by 40 ft wide and 8 sluice gates 10 ft high by 5.67 ft wide. Closure of dam was made Feb. 19, 1943; water in reservoir first reached minimum pool elevation Feb. 25, 1943. Revised capacity table put into use Jan. 1, 1971. Total capacity at elevation 1,002.00 ft, top of gates, is 743,600 cfs-days, of which 631,200 cfs-days is controlled storage above elevation 940.00 ft, normal minimum pool. Reservoir is used for navigation, flood control, and power. COOPERATION.--Records furnished by Tennessee Valley Authority. EXTREMES FOR PERIOD OF RECORD.--Maximum contents, 760,000 cfs-days, July 25, 1949, elevation, 1,001.79 ft; minimum after first filling, 1,000 cfs-days, Jan. 16, 1956, elevation, 883.7 ft, estimated. EXTREMES FOR CURRENT YEAR.--Maximum contents, 693,300 cfs-days, Sept. 20, elevation, 999.18 ft; minimum, 112,000 cfs-days, Jan. 23, elevation, 941.25 ft. 03476000 SOUTH HOLSTON LAKE.--Lat 36o31'15", long 82o05'11", Sullivan County, Hydrologic Unit 06010102, 470 ft upstream from South Holston Dam on South Fork Holston River, 7.0 mi southeast of Bristol, Virginia-Tennessee, and at mile 49.8.
    [Show full text]
  • Part 02 SSAR (Rev. 0)
    Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report SUBSECTION 2.4.3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 2.4.3 Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) on Streams and Rivers .......... 2.4.3-1 2.4.3.1 Watershed Characteristics ...................................... 2.4.3-1 2.4.3.2 Probable Maximum Precipitation ............................ 2.4.3-1 2.4.3.3 Precipitation Losses ................................................ 2.4.3-3 2.4.3.4 Runoff and Stream Course Models ........................ 2.4.3-3 2.4.3.5 Probable Maximum Flood Flow .............................. 2.4.3-6 2.4.3.6 Water Level Determinations ................................... 2.4.3-7 2.4.3.7 Coincident Wind Wave Activity ............................... 2.4.3-7 2.4.3.8 References ............................................................. 2.4.3-8 2.4.3-i Revision 0 Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report SUBSECTION 2.4.3 LIST OF TABLES Number Title 2.4.3-1 Flood Events Analyzed 2.4.3-2 Sub-Basins, Areas and Rainfall Depth 2.4.3-3 Temporal Rainfall Distribution for the 7980 Sq Mi PMP 2.4.3-ii Revision 0 Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report SUBSECTION 2.4.3 LIST OF FIGURES Number Title 2.4.3-1 Tennessee River System Watershed Sub-Basins 2.4.3-2 Rainfall Time Distribution – Typical Mass Curve 2.4.3-3 PMF Elevation and Discharge Hydrograph at Clinch River Nuclear Site 2.4.3-4 (Sheet 1 of 2) Flood Operational Guide – Norris Dam 2.4.3-4
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of The
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE LANDBETWEEN THE LAKESNATIONAL RECREATION AREA PROCEEDINGS OF THE TENTH SYMPOSIUM THENATURAL HISTORY OF LOWERTENNESSEE AND CUMBERLANDRIVER VALLEYS BRANDONSPRING GROUP CAMP LAND BETWEENTHE LAKES MARCH 2 1 AND 22,2003 SPONSOREDBY AUSTINPEAY STATE UNIVERSI~ THECENTER OF EXCELLENCE FOR FIELDBIOLOGY AND MURRAYSTATE UNIVERSITY CENTERFOR RESERVOIR RESEARCH AND U. S. DEPARTMENTOF AGRICULTURE, FOREST SERVICE LAND BETWEENTHE LAKES NATIONAL RECREATION AREA Austin Peay State University - A Tennessee Board of Regents Institution -is an equal opportunit>.employer committed to the education of a non-racially identifiable student body. AP- 043/08-03/200 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 10th SYMPOSIUM ON THE NATURAL HISTORY OF LOWER TENNESSEE AND CUMBERLAND RIVER VALLEYS HELDAT BRANDONSPRING GROUP CAMP LAND BETWEENTHE LAKES MARCH 2 1 AND 22,2003 Sponsored by: The Center of Excellence for Field Biology Austin Peay State University, Clarksville, Tenn. and The Center for Reservoir Research Murray State University, Murray, Ky. and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Land Between The Lakes National Recreation Area Golden Pond, Ky. EDITED BY: Laurina I. Lyle, Edward W. Chester and A. Floyd Scott The Center of Excellence Field Biology Austin Peay State University, Clarksville, Tenn. 37044 Published by and available from: The Center of Excellence for Field Biology, Austin Peay State University, Clarksville, Tenn. 37044 Price: $5.00 SUGGESTED CITATION II Lyle, L.I., E. W. Chester, and A. F. Scott. 2003. Proceedings of the lothSymposium on the Natural History of Lower Tennessee and Cumberland River Valleys. The Center of Excellence for Field Biology, Austin Peay State University, Clarksville, Tenn. Published September 2003 PREFACE The lod' Symposium on the Natural History of Lower Tennessee and Cumberland River Valleys was held at Brandon Spring Group Camp in TVA's Land Between The Lakes on March 2 1 and 22, 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Kentucky's Lakes and Their Namesm
    • .._ < ~KENTUCKY'S LAKES AND THEIR NAMESM William A. Withington (University of Kentucky) (Paper presented at the Second Blue Ridge Onomastics Symposium, Roanoke, Virginia, May 16, 1987 ) ABSTRACT. A set of 107 major and lesser lakes situated in all of the state's major regions are the base in an analysis of the diversity of lakes and names of lakes in Kentucky. With a few e x ceptions, Kentucky lakes are artificial created by damming of streams beginning with Herrington, the first large lake, in 1925. Lake names have been grouped into fourteen categories. Three-fourths of the lakes have names in the three categories of Stream (30); community (27); and person (22). Terrain (5) and Administrative Unit (5) are the two most frequent names used among the other 28 Kentt1cky lakes in this study set. Kentucky ' s present landsca pe gives the appearance of a very well-watered terrain with many rivers, lakes and ponds. However, e x cept for a few water bodies in the lower Ohio and Mississippie River lowlands of westernmost Kentucky, the lakes are reservoirs or "tanks" --The U.S. Geological Survey's term--created artificially by damming s treams. Prior to the creation of Kentucky' s first large lake, Lake Herrington in 1925, mos t were small, usually associated with gristmills in need of local waterpower or with communities establishing water supply reservoirs . Beginning with Lake Herrington, c onstructed by Kentucky Ut ilities for hydroelectric power on the lower Di x River, a large number of lakes have been created in all parts of the state.
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Frequency of Streams in Rural Basins of Tennessee
    FLOOD FREQUENCY OF STREAMS IN RURAL BASINS OF TENNESSEE By Jess D. Weaver and Charles R. Gamble U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 92-4165 Prepared in cooperation with the TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Nashville, Tennessee 1993 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, Jr., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section 810 Broadway, Suite 500 Federal Center Nashville, Tennessee 37203 Box 25425 Denver, Colorado 80225 CONTENTS Abstract .......................................................... 1 Introduction ....................................................... 1 Description of the study area ......................................... 1 Data used in the analysis ............................................ 4 Flood-frequency analysis at gaging stations .................................... 4 Regional flood-frequency analysis .......................................... 4 Ordinary least-squares regression analysis ................................. 18 Generalized least-squares regression analysis ................................ 18 Methods of estimating flood frequency ....................................... 20 Gaged sites .................................................... 20 Ungaged sites ................................................... 20 Method A .................................................. 20 Method B
    [Show full text]
  • Stratigraphy and Structure of the Western Kentucky Fluorspar District
    Stratigraphy and Structure of the Western Kentucky Fluorspar District GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER Prepared tn cooperation with the Geological Surrey Stratigraphy and Structure of the Western Kentucky Fluorspar District 53? Robert D. Trace and Dewey H. Amos CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE GEOLOGY OF KENTUCKY GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1151-D Prepared in cooperation with the Kentucky Geological Survey Mississippian and Pennsylvanian limestone and clastic rocks are exposed in northeast- trending horsts and grab ens UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, W ASH I NGT O N : 1984 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Trace, Robert Denny, 1917- Stratigraphy and structure of the western Kentucky fluorspar district. (Contributions to the geology of Kentucky) (Geological Survey professional paper ; 1151-D) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.16:1151-D 1. Geology, Stratigraphic Mississippian. 2. Geology, Stratigraphic Pennsylvanian. 3. Geology Kentucky. I. Amos, Dewey Harold, 1925- joint author. II. Kentucky. Geological Survey. III. Title. IV. Series. V. Series: United States. Geological Survey. Professional paper ; 1151-D. QE672.T7 551.7'009769 80-607000 For sale by the Distribution Branch, U.S. Geological Survey, 604 South Pickett Street, Alexandria, VA 22304 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract ————————————— Dl Stratigraphy—Continued Introduction ——————————— 2 Pennsylvanian System—Continued Production ——————————— 3 Morrowan Provincial Series—Continued History of previous geologic work • 4 Caseyville Formation—Continued Stratigraphy — 5 Caseyville Formation, undivided, along eastern Mississippian System —— 5 margin of district ——————— ———— D22 Osagean Provincial Series——————— 5 Sequence between the Pounds Sandstone Fort Payne Formation——————— 5 Member of the Caseyville Formation and Meramecian Provincial Series ———— 7 the Grindstaff Sandstone Member of the Trade- Warsaw-Salem-St.
    [Show full text]
  • Nolichucky River
    DRAFT· wild and scenic river study january 1980 NOLICHUCKY RIVER NORTH CAROliNA/TENNESSEE AS THE NATION'S PRINCIPAL CONSEHVATION AGENCY, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR HAS BASIC RESPONSIBILITIES FOR WATER, FISH, WILDLIFE, MINERAL, LAND, PARK AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES. INDIAN P,ND TERRITORIAL AFFAIRS ARE OTHER MAJOR CONCERNS OF AMERICA'S "DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES." THE DEPARTMENT WORKS TO ASSURE THE WISEST CHOICE IN MANAGING ALL OUR RESOURCES SO EACH WIU MAKE ITS FULL CONTRIBUTION TO A BEITER UNITED STATES NOW AND tN THE FUTURE. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Cecil D. Andrus, Secretary United States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 APR 16 1SbtJ Honorable Douglas M. Castle Administrator Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Mr. Castle: In accordance with the prov~s~ons of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (82 Stat. 906) copies of the Department's draft report on the Nolichucky River are enclosed for your review and comment. As provided in Section 4(b) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, your views on the report will accompany it when transmitted to the President and Congress. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act provides for a review period of up to 90 days for the draft report. In order to expedite the study process, we would appreciate receiving your comments within 45 days of the date of this letter. The National Park Service is providing staff assistance on this proposal and can provide any further information you need to complete your review. Please contact Mr. Robert Eastman of that agency (telephone 202/343-5213) if you have any questions.
    [Show full text]