Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix IV Monitoring Appendix IV DWQ Water Quality Monitoring Programs in the New River Basin Appendices DWQ Water Quality Monitoring Programs in the New River Basin Staff in the Environmental Sciences Section (ESS) and Regional Offices of DWQ collect a variety of biological, chemical and physical data. The following discussion contains a brief introduction to each program, followed by a summary of water quality data in the New River basin for that program. For more detailed information on sampling and assessment of streams in this basin, refer to the Basinwide Assessment Report for the New River basin, available on the ESS website at http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/bar.html or by calling (919) 733-9960. DWQ monitoring programs for the New River Basin include: • Benthic Macroinvertebrates • Aquatic Toxicity Monitoring • Lake Assessment • Ambient Monitoring System Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Benthic macroinvertebrates, or benthos, are organisms that live in and on the bottom substrates of rivers and streams. These organisms are primarily aquatic insect larvae. The use of benthos data has proven to be a reliable monitoring tool, as benthic macroinvertebrates are sensitive to subtle changes in water quality. Since macroinvertebrates have life cycles of six months to over one year, the effects of short-term pollution (i.e., chemical spill) will generally not be overcome until the following generation appears. The benthic community also integrates the effects of a wide array of potential pollutant mixtures. Criteria have been developed to assign a bioclassification to each benthic sample based on the number of different species present in the pollution intolerant groups of Ephemeroptera (Mayflies), Plecoptera (Stoneflies) and Trichoptera (Caddisflies), commonly referred to as EPT. A Biotic Index (BI) value gives an indication of overall community pollution tolerance. Different benthic macroinvertebrate criteria have been developed for different ecoregions (i.e., mountains, piedmont, coastal plain and swamp) within North Carolina and bioclassifications fall into five categories: Excellent, Good, Good-Fair, Fair and Poor. Overview of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data There were 42 benthic samples collected during this assessment period. The following table lists the total bioclassifications (by subbasin) for all benthos sites in the New River basin. Benthos sampling may slightly overestimate the proportion of Fair, Poor and Severe stress sites, as DWQ special studies often have the greatest sampling intensity (number of sites/stream) in areas where it is believed that water quality problems exist. Many streams also ceased flowing during the drought of 2001 and 2002. For detailed information regarding the samples collected during this assessment period, refer to the tables at the end of this appendix. A-IV-1 Summary of Bioclassifications for All Freshwater Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sites (using the most recent rating for each site) in the New River Basin Subbasin Excellent Good Good-Fair Fair Poor Not Rated Total 05-07-01 8 8 4 0 2 0 22 05-07-02 8 2 0 0 1 0 11 05-07-03 4 4 1 0 0 0 9 Total (#) 20 14 5 0 3 0 42 Total (%) 48 33 12 0 7 0 100 Assessing Benthic Macroinvertebrate Communities in Small Streams The benthic macroinvertebrate community of small streams is naturally less diverse than the streams used to develop the current criteria for flowing freshwater streams. The benthic macroinvertebrate database is being evaluated, and a study to systematically look at small reference streams in different ecoregions is being developed with the goal of finding a way to evaluate water quality conditions in such small streams. Presently, a designation of Not Impaired may be used for flowing waters that are too small to be assigned a bioclassification (less than 4 meters in width) but meet the criteria for a Good-Fair or higher bioclassification using the standard qualitative and EPT criteria. This designation will translate into a use support rating of Supporting. However, DWQ will use the monitoring information from small streams to identify potential impacts to small streams even in cases when a use support rating cannot be assigned. DWQ will use this monitoring information to identify potential impacts to these waters even though a use support rating is not assigned. DWQ will continue to develop criteria to assess water quality in small streams. Aquatic Toxicity Monitoring Acute and/or chronic toxicity tests are used to determine toxicity of discharges to sensitive aquatic species (usually fathead minnows or the water flea, Ceriodaphnia dubia). Results of these tests have been shown by several researchers to be predictive of discharge effects on receiving stream populations. Many facilities are required to monitor whole effluent toxicity (WET) by their NPDES permit or by administrative letter. The Aquatic Toxicology Unit (ATU) may also test other facilities. Per Section 106 of the Clean Water Act, the ATU is required to test at least 10 percent of the major discharging facilities over the course of the federal fiscal year (FFY). However, it is ATU’s target to test 20 percent of the major dischargers in the FFY. This means that each major facility would get evaluated over the course of their five-year permit. There are no requirements or targets for minor dischargers. In addition, the ATU maintains a compliance summary for all facilities required to perform tests and provides monthly updates of this information to regional offices and DWQ administration. A-IV-2 Ambient toxicity tests can be used to evaluate stream water quality relative to other stream sites and/or a point source discharge. Six NPDES permits in the New River basin currently require WET testing. All six permits have a WET limit. The number of facilities required to monitor WET has increased steadily since 1987, the first year that WET limits were written into permits in North Carolina. The compliance rate has risen as well. Since 1996, the compliance rate has stabilized at approximately 90 percent. The following graph summaries WET monitoring compliance in the New River basin from 1986 to 2003. Facilities with toxicity problems during the most recent two-year review period are discussed in subbasin chapters. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 198 6 198 7 198 8 198 9 199 0 199 1 199 2 199 3 199 4 199 5 199 6 199 7 199 8 199 9 200 0 200 1 200 2 200 3 Year Fa c i l i t i e s M o n i t o r i n g 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Co m p l i a n c e ( % ) No. Facilities % Meeting Permit Limit NPDES facility WET compliance in the New River basin, 1986-2003. The compliance values were calculated by determining whether facilities with WET limits were meeting their ultimate permit limits during the given time period, regardless of any SOCs in force. Lakes Assessment Program One lake (Appalachian State University Lake) was sampled as part of the Lakes Assessment Program. In 2003, ASU Lake was sampled three times during the summer months (June, July A-IV-3 A-IV-4 and August). Surface physical data and photic zone chemistry data collected from 1998 to 2003 indicate that the lake remains oligotrophic, and no parameters were elevated. Ambient Monitoring System The Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) is a network of stream, lake and estuarine stations strategically located for the collection of physical and chemical water quality data. North Carolina has more than 378 water chemistry monitoring stations statewide, including 7 stations in the New River basin. Between 23 and 32 parameters are collected monthly at each station. The locations of these stations are listed in the following table and shown on individual subbasin maps. Notable ambient water quality parameters are discussed in the subbasin chapters. Refer to the 2003 New River Basinwide Assessment Report at http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/bar.html for more detailed analysis of ambient water quality monitoring data. Locations of Ambient Monitoring Stations in the New River Basin by Subbasin Subbasin/ Map Code Station Number Waterbody/ Location County Class 05-07-01 K2100000 S Fork New R. at US 221 and 421 at Perkinsville Ashe C + K3250000 S Fork New R. at NC 16 and 88 near Jefferson Ashe WS-IV HQW K4500000 S Fork New R. at NC 221 near Scottville Ashe B ORW 05-07-02 K7500000 N Fork New R. at SR 1573 at Crumpler Ashe C + 05-07-03 K7900000 New R. at SR 1345 at Amelia Alleghany C ORW K9700000 Little R. at SR 1433 Hooker Rd -- Edwards Crossroads Alleghany C K9900000 Little R. at NC18 near Blevins Crossroads Alleghany C ORW A-IV-5 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data Collected in the New River Basin, 1983 – 2003 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 05-07-01 M Fk S Fk New R US 321 & Blue Ridge Pkwy Watauga 10-1-2-(6) 11/8/89 --- 18 --- 3.54 Fair M Fk S Fk New R US 321 & Gold Mine Cr Watauga 10-1-2-(6) 11/8/89 --- 32 --- 3.39 Good M Fk S Fk New R SR 1522 Watauga 10-1-2-(15) 8/20/03 --- 24 --- 3.25 Good-Fair 8/17/98 --- 31 --- 3.13 Good 7/12/93 --- 37 --- 3.10 Excellent E Fk S Fk New R SR 1522 Watauga 10-1-3-(8) 8/20/03 --- 31 --- 3.07 Good 8/17/98 --- 32 --- 3.46 Good 7/12/93 --- 37 --- 3.49 Excellent 7/12/93 --- 37 --- 3.10 Excellent S Fk New R Hunting Ln Watauga 10-1-(3.5) 7/26/88 --- 27 --- 4.04 Good-Fair S Fk New R US 421/221 Watauga 10-1-(3.5) 8/20/03 67 24 5.45 4.80 Good-Fair 8/17/98 71 22 5.70 4.17 Good-Fair 7/21/93 69 18 6.22 3.89 Fair 7/26/88 72 26 6.30 4.55 Good-Fair 7/24/86 70 18 6.92 5.09 Fair 8/8/84 49 16 6.27 4.08 Fair S Fk New R SR 1355 Watauga 10-1-(3.5) 7/26/88 --- 33 --- 4.46 Good S Fk New R SR 1352 Watauga 10-1-(3.5) 7/26/88 98 41 5.28 4.03 Good Winkler Creek SR 1549 Watauga 10-1-4-(3.5) 8/21/03 --- 39 --- 2.35 Excellent 8/17/98 --- 34 --- 2.96 Good 7/12/93 --- 37 --- 2.19 Excellent Howard Cr SR 1306 Watauga 10-1-9-(6) 3/6/90 --- 36 --- 2.15 Good Howard Cr SR 1328 Watauga 10-1-9-(6) 8/20/03 --- 35 --- 2.35 Good 8/17/98 --- 40 --- 2.77 Excellent 7/13/93 102 52 3.91 2.90 Excellent 7/26/88 --- 38 --- 3.34 Excellent Meat Camp Cr SR 1340 Watauga 10-1-10 8/21/03 --- 32 --- 1.85 Good Meat Camp Cr SR 1335 Watauga 10-1-10 3/9/90 --- 42 --- 2.39 Good Meat Camp Cr SR 1333 Watauga 10-1-10 8/20/03 --- 35 --- 2.81 Good 8/17/98 --- 39 --- 2.79 Excellent 7/13/93 --- 31 --- 2.68 Good 3/5/90 --- 37 --- 2.63 Good Norris Fk SR 1337 Watauga 10-1-10-2 8/20/03 --- 45 --- 1.56 Excellent Grassy Cr SR 1351 Ashe 10-1-14 3/6/90 --- 40 --- 2.85 Good Elk Cr NC 194 Ashe 10-1-15 4/9/96 --- 39 --- 3.49 Excellent Pine Orchard Cr SR 1369 Watauga 10-1-15-1 8/21/03 --- 41 --- 1.63 Excellent S Fk New R US 221 Ashe 10-1-(20.5) 7/14/93 116 49 4.72 3.60 Excellent S Fk New R SR 1169 Ashe 10-1-(20.5) 8/21/03 98 45 4.19 3.33 Excellent 8/18/98 101 48 4.68 3.57 Excellent Mill Cr SR 1109 Ashe 10-1-18 3/6/90 --- 33 --- 2.69 Good-Fair S Fk New R NC 16/88 Ashe 10-1-(20.5) 8/22/03 104 58 3.58 3.12 Excellent 8/18/98 95 48 4.03 3.27 Excellent 7/14/93 104 51 3.42 2.83 Excellent 7/11/90 97 50 3.84 3.19 Excellent 8/6/87 105 50 4.30 3.43 Excellent Old Field Cr SR 1106 Ashe 10-1-22 4/9/96 --- 44 --- 2.13 Excellent 3/6/90 --- 42 --- 2.42 Excellent W Pr Old Field Cr SR 1112 Ashe 10-1-22-1 7/14/93 83 39 3.66 2.74 Excellent 5/14/90 --- 42 --- 1.98 Excellent Gap Cr US 221 Ashe 10-1-23-(0.5) 4/8/96 --- 29 --- 2.98 Good-Fair Pine Swamp Cr SR 1179 Ashe 10-1-24 3/6/90 --- 31 --- 2.55 Good-Fair Pine Swamp Cr Off SR 1179 Ashe 10-1-24 8/19/03 --- 30 --- 3.14 Good Beaver Cr SR 1181 Ashe 10-1-25 3/6/90 --- 37 --- 2.87 Good S Beaver Cr SR 1147 Ashe 10-1-25-2 8/21/03 --- 31 --- 2.68 Good Obids Cr SR 1192 Ashe 10-1-27-(2) 8/19/03 --- 32 --- 3.16 Good Bear Cr NC 18 Ashe 10-1-28 3/7/90 --- 35 --- 2.12 Good Roan Cr SR 1588 Ashe 10-1-31-(2) 8/18/03 --- 44 --- 3.02 Excellent 8/18/98 --- 39 --- 2.74 Excellent 7/14/93 --- 39 --- 3.10 Excellent Naked Cr NC 16/88 Ashe 10-1-32 8/19/03 57 23 5.68 4.85 Good-Fair 8/18/98 71 32 5.28 4.11 Good-Fair 7/14/93 84 36 4.74 3.91 Good A-IV-6 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 7/29/86 78 29 5.33 4.17 Good-Fair Naked Cr Old SR 1585 Ashe 10-1-32 8/19/03 70 30 4.90 4.11 Good-Fair 8/17/98 49 13 7.53 5.12 Poor 7/15/93 54 18 6.79 5.33 Fair 7/29/86 41 6 7.94 5.34 Poor Dog Cr SR 1592 Ashe 10-1-33 3/7/90 --- 32 --- 2.92 Good S Fk New R US 221 Ashe 10-1-(33.5) 8/23/03 112 47 4.50 3.42 Excellent 8/20/98 112 55 4.27 3.31 Excellent 7/15/93 103 46 4.07 2.96 Excellent 5/14/90 --- 59 --- 2.83 Excellent 3/7/90 84 48 3.83 2.78 Good 8/9/89 95 44 4.26 3.63 Excellent 8/5/87 101 45 4.71 3.44 Excellent 8/7/85 92 38 5.44 3.61 Good-Fair 5/29/85 133 63 3.96 3.15 Excellent 2/18/85 102 45 4.32 3.20 Good 12/11/84 110 47 4.24 3.12 Good 8/8/83 95 42 4.25 3.53 Good Peak Cr Off SR 1599 (Ab Ore Knob) Ashe 10-1-35 8/18/03 --- 31 --- 2.53 Good 8/19/98 --- 35 --- 2.93 Good 4/8/96 74 42 3.60 2.59 Excellent 7/15/93 --- 35 --- 2.74 Good 4/15/91 101 50 3.43 2.70 Excellent 3/9/90 --- 38 --- 2.46 Good Peak Cr Off SR 1599 (Be Ore Knob) Ashe 10-1-35 8/18/03 --- 6 --- 2.50 Poor 1/13/99 --- 6 --- 1.98 Poor 8/19/98 --- 23 --- 3.42 Good-Fair 4/8/96 30 19 3.67 2.09 Fair 7/15/93 --- 4 --- 3.75 Poor 4/15/91 46 22 4.02 2.96 Fair 3/7/90 --- 6 --- 2.05 Poor Peak Cr SR 1599 Ashe 10-1-35 1/13/99 --- 9 --- 3.53 Poor 4/8/96 18 8 3.95 1.96 Poor 4/15/91 39 17 3.79 2.07 Fair Peak Cr SR 1595 Ashe 10-1-35 4/8/96 16 8 4.17 2.55 Poor 4/16/91 31 11 4.82 2.16 Fair L Peak Cr SR 1595 Ashe 10-1-35-4 8/19/03 --- 6 --- 1.94 Poor 8/19/98 --- 7 --- 2.00 Poor 4/8/96 --- 7 --- 3.11 Poor 4/16/91 --- 5 --- 2.02 Poor Nathans Cr SR 1596 Ashe 10-1-36 3/7/90 --- 24 --- 2.72 Good-Fair Nathans Cr Off US 221 Ashe 10-1-36 8/19/98 --- 29 --- 3.10 Good-Fair 5/11/98 --- 38 --- 3.87 Good Cranberry Cr SR 1609 Ashe 10-1-37 5/13/98 81 43 4.40 3.21 Good Cranberry Cr SR 1603 Ashe 10-1-37 8/18/03 106 52 3.94 3.07 Excellent 8/19/98 79 42 3.90 3.13 Excellent Cranberry Cr SR 1600 Ashe 10-1-37 7/15/93 --- 46 --- 3.16 Excellent 3/7/90 --- 37 --- 2.89 Good Meadow Fk Off SR 1193 Ashe 10-1-37-2 5/12/98 91 56 2.77 1.68 Excellent 8/20/98 64 41 2.57 1.42 Excellent Meadow Fk SR 1145 Ashe 10-1-37-2 5/13/98 88 50 3.48 2.44 Excellent Piney Fk SR 1149/NC 18 Ashe 10-1-37-3 5/12/98 72 35 3.47 1.99 Good Reeves Br NC 18/13 Ashe 10-1-37-3-2 8/19/98 85 40 3.66 2.97 Excellent 5/12/98 94 54 3.64 2.96 Excellent Prathers Cr SR 1300 Alleghany 10-1-38 3/7/90 --- 33 --- 3.07 Good-Fair 05-07-02 N Fk New R SR 1100 Ashe 10-2-(1) 8/19/03 80 44 4.0 3.50 Excellent 08/17/98 96 52 4.11 3.33 Excellent 7/29/93 102 50 3.94 3.01 Excellent 3/14/89 --- 43 --- 2.9 Good Hoskin Fk NC 88/SR 1119 Ashe 10-2-7 8/19/03 --- 37 --- 2.91 Excellent 8/17/98 --- 35 --- 3.7 Good 7/23/93 --- 31 --- 3.85 Good N Fk New R SR 1340 Ashe 10-2-(12) 9/14/89 99 48 4.23 3.01 Good N Fk New R SR 1644 Ashe 10-2-(12) 8/21/03 72 45 3.67 3.3 Excellent 8/19/98 87 50 3.83 2.95 Excellent 7/28/93 93 46 3.99 2.94 Excellent A-IV-7 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 3/8/90 89 53 3.39 2.81 Excellent 3/14/89 --- 34 --- 2.64 Good N Fk New R NC 16 Ashe 10-2-(12) 8/21/03 80 48 3.76 3.43 Excellent 8/19/98 87 47 4 3.04 Excellent 7/28/93 116 57 3.93 2.56 Excellent 3/14/89 90 47 3.96 2.63 Good 8/9/89 101 45 4.38 3.68 Excellent 8/5/87 99 45 4.48 3.33 Excellent 8/7/85 87 33 4.89 3.29 Good 8/8/83 88 41 3.78 2.97 Excellent Three Top Cr SR 1100 Ashe 10-2-13 8/19/03 --- 35 --- 2.9 Good 8/17/98 77 41 4.35 3.55 Good 7/29/93 95 48 3.81 2.95 Excellent 3/14/89 --- 38 --- 2.57 Good Long Hope Cr SR 1100 Ashe 10-2-13-3 3/8/90 --- 32 --- 1.64 Good Big Laurel Cr SR 1322 Ashe 10-2-14 3/8/90 --- 32 --- 2.43 Good Big Laurel Cr SR 1315 Ashe 10-2-14 12/11/84 83 35 4.28 2.97 Good Big Laurel Cr NC 88 Ashe 10-2-14 8/19/03 --- 38 --- 2.92 Excellent 7/17/98 --- 40 --- 3.66 Excellent 7/29/93 --- 48 --- 3.42 Excellent Rich Hill Cr NC 88 Ashe 10-2-15 7/28/93 --- 38 --- 3.4 Excellent Buffalo Cr SR 1125/1133 Ashe 10-2-20 7/29/86 82 38 3.4 3.09 Good 8/19/85 74 38 4.11 3.13 Good Buffalo Cr Ab L buffalo Cr Ashe 10-2-20 5/30/85 87 38 4.59 2.9 Good Buffalo Cr NC 88/194 Ashe 10-2-20 8/19/03 --- 36 2.13 2.81 Excellent 8/18/98 --- 26 --- 3.99 Good-Fair 7/13/93 --- 38 --- 3.24 Excellent L Buffalo Cr US 221 Ashe 10-2-20-1 5/29/85 24 4 7.65 3.9 Poor Little Buffalo Cr Nr SR 1153 Ashe 10-2-20-1 8/20/03 21 6 6.58 4.11 Poor 8/18/98 39 14 7.11 5.38 Fair 7/13/93 24 0 8.31 0 Poor 2/19/85 22 5 8.36 2.12 Poor 5/29/85 26 5 8.31 1.75 Poor L Buffalo Cr 2.6 mi be WWTP Ashe 10-2-20-1 2/19/85 44 16 6.7 4.73 Fair UT L Buffalo Cr Ab WWTP Ashe 10-2-20-1 7/13/93 27 6 7.85 2.24 Poor 2/18/85 22 4 8.18 2.14 Poor 5/29/85 27 7 7.86 3.66 Poor Big Horse Cr SR 1362 Ashe 10-2-21-(4.5) 3/8/90 --- 33 --- 2.18 Good-Fair Big Horse Cr SR 1644/NC 194 Ashe 10-2-21-(7) 8/19/03 89 50 3.94 3.42 Excellent 8/18/98 103 56 4.23 3.23 Excellent 7/28/93 129 56 4.13 2.85 Excellent 3/14/89 --- 41 --- 2.69 Good Little Horse Cr SR 1334 Ashe 10-2-21-8 8/19/03 --- 33 --- 3.02 Good 8/18/98 --- 35 --- 3.78 Good L Phoenix Cr Off SR 1573 Ashe 10-2-23 5/11/98 72 41 3.35 2.46 Good Silas Cr SR 1544 Ashe 10-2-24 8/18/98 --- 31 --- 2.61 NR 5/11/98 73 40 3.37 2.15 Good 7/28/93 --- 39 --- 2.76 NR Old Field Cr SR 1537 Ashe 10-2-26 05/98 77 36 3.60 2.31 Good Helton Cr SR 1536 Ashe 10-2-27 8/18/03 --- 40 --- 3.12 Excellent 8/18/98 --- 37 --- 3.13 Excellent Helton Cr SR 1539 Ashe 10-2-27 3/14/89 --- 34 --- 2.67 Good 05-07-03 New R SR 1345 Alleghany 10 8/21/03 86 51 3.55 3.13 Excellent 8/19/98 73 37 4.4 3.31 Good 7/26/93 102 47 4.76 3.72 Excellent 7/11/90 99 49 4.89 3.38 Good 8/10/89 97 43 4.2 3.61 Good 7/25/88 104 42 5.37 4.12 Good 8/5/87 99 41 4.87 3.72 Good 8/6/86 123 43 5.43 4.23 Good 7/1/85 113 45 5.48 4.05 Good 8/8/84 100 45 4.34 3.59 Excellent 8/8/83 105 50 4.61 3.84 Excellent Elk Cr SR 1344 Alleghany 10-6-(2) 8/18/03 --- 34 --- 3.51 Good 8/20/98 --- 34 --- 3.55 Good 7/26/93 --- 36 --- 3.6 Excellent Pine Swamp Cr SR 1128 Alleghany 10-9-5 8/18/03 --- 26 --- 3.64 Good-Fair 8/20/98 --- 34 --- 3.58 Good A-IV-8 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 7/27/93 --- 33 --- 3.64 Good Little R Be NC 18/SR 1141 Alleghany 10 5/13/98 71 40 2.46 1.74 Good Little R SR 1128 Alleghany 10-9-(6) 8/18/03 75 36 4.04 3.52 Good 8/20/98 72 37 3.94 3.18 Good 7/26/93 84 45 3.37 2.62 Excellent 3/15/89 --- 43 --- 2.76 Good Little R SR 1424 Allegheny 10-9-(6) 8/21/03 104 49 4.12 3.23 Excellent 8/20.98 80 41 3.93 2.95 Excellent 7/26/93 98 48 3.97 2.92 Excellent 3/15/89 --- 19 --- 3.26 Fair Little R NC 18 Allegheny 10-9-(6) 8/20/03 89 47 3.96 3.4 Excellent 8/20/98 84 46 3.62 2.85 Excellent 7/27/93 89 49 3.78 2.93 Excellent 7/11/90 93 44 4.36 3.23 Excellent 3/15/89 106 56 3.75 2.61 Excellent 7/25/88 95 45 4.5 3.23 Excellent 8/6/86 111 46 4.5 3.1 Good 8/9/84 109 49 3.98 3.16 Excellent Bledsoe Cr SR 1172 Allegheny 10-9-7 8/20/03 --- 30 --- 3.39 Good 8/19’98 --- 21 --- 4.68 Good-Fair 7/26/93 --- 33 --- 3.43 Good Glade Cr SR 1422 Allegheny 10-9-9 8/20/03 82 42 4.39 4.0 Good Glade Cr SR 1422 farther dwnstrm Allegheny 10-9-9 11/5/03 --- 35 --- 2.84 Good Brush Cr SR 1422 Allegheny 10-9-10 8/20/03 83 42 3.93 3.34 Excellent 8/20/98 62 36 4.12 3.69 Good 7/27/93 96 40 4.78 3.5 Good Laurel Br Off NC 21 Allegheny 10-9-10-2 9/3/92 --- 5 --- 6.39 Poor 8/31/88 --- 15 --- 3.43 Fair 8/31/88 --- 8 --- 2.77 Poor Laurel Br SR 1105 Allegheny 10-9-10-2 8/18/03 66 33 4.13 3.53 Good 8/21/98 49 28 3.78 2.9 Good 9/3/92 --- 14 --- 4.52 Fair 8/16/89 --- 11 --- 4.0 Fair 8/31/88 --- 22 --- 2.83 Good-Fair 12/6/88 --- 17 --- 3.83 Fair L Glade Br At Parkway Allegheny 10-9-10-3 9/2/92 99 46 3.4 2.43 Excellent L Glade Br Be NC 21 Allegheny 10-9-10-3 9/2/92 92 46 3.76 2.71 Excellent Crab Cr SR 1450 Allegheny 10-9-12 11/5/03 --- 33 --- 3.71 Good