Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Nationally Consistent NHDPlus Framework for Identifying Interstate Waters: Implications for Integrated Assessments and Interjurisdictional TMDLs

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) program promotes nationally consistent approaches for documenting the progress in restoring impaired waters. EPA’s TMDL program provides tracking systems comprising both database and geographic information systems (GIS) mapping components. The GIS mapping is implemented using the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). The EPA and the US Geological Survey have developed an enhanced NHD product (NHDPlus) that is applied in this study to define an interstate waters framework for the conterminous United States. This NHDPlus-based framework provides an efficient watershed-oriented approach for selecting interstate waters. Greater consistency in approaches for interstate waters is essential for providing improved techniques for integrated assessment and management programs. Improved analysis tools for interstate waters are clearly important from a federal perspective. Insights based on tools for federal interstate waters are also of interest for state water quality agencies when they deal with complicated interjurisdictional challenges that can require leveraging support from a wide range of stakeholders. Summaries are provided on the degree of consistency documented for inland waters where states have provided TMDL listing GIS information for shared interstate NHD reaches, and summaries are provided on the patterns for interstate assessments organized according to the ecoregions developed for EPA’s Wadeable Streams Assessment. The relevance of this interstate waters framework in leveraging the TMDL program to provide enhanced support for watershed oriented management approaches is also explored.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Benke A, Cushing C (eds) (2005) Rivers of North America. Elsevier Academic Press, Burlington, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruhn M, Cooter W, Bondelid T, Ilieve P, Pickren K, Rao S (2006) Watershed analyses using NHD-based area of investigation tools. In: Proceedings of the 2006 AWRA spring specialty conference, GIS and water resources IV, Houston, Texas, May, 8–10, 2006. American Water Resources Association, Middleburg, VA

  • Cooter W (2004) Clean water act assessment processes in relation to changing U.S. Environmental Protection Agency management strategies. Environmental Science and Technology 38(20):5265–5273

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cooter W, Ilieve P, Sparks K, Miller A, Spoerri C, McCarthy M, Dabolt T (2000) Detailed, nationally consistent mapping and spatial analysis of section 303(d) and 305(b) waterbodies using the EPA reach file and the national hydrography dataset. In: Proceedings of the WEF watershed 2000 conference, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, July 8–12, 2000. Water Environment Federation, Alexandria, VA

  • Downing D, Winer C, Wood L (2003) Navigating through clean water act jurisdiction: a legal review. Wetlands 23(3):475–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FGDA (Federal Geographic Data Committee) (2009) Wetlands mapping standard. FGDC document number FGDC-STD-015-2009. FGDC Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee Secretariat, US Geological Survey, Reston, VA. Available from http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/_documents/gNSDI/FGDCWetlandsMappingStandard.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • Freeman M, Pringle C, Jackson C (2007) Hydrologic connectivity and the contribution of stream headwaters to ecological integrity at regional scales. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43(1):5–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gesch D, Evans G, Mauck J, Hutchinson J, Carswell WJ Jr (2009) The national map: elevation. U.S. geological survey fact sheet 2009-3053. U.S. Geological Survey, Rolla Publishing Service Center. Available from http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2009/3053/pdf/fs2009_3053.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • Gleyzer A, Denisyuk M, Rimmer A, Salingar Y (2004) A fast recursive GIS algorithm for computing Strahler stream order in braided and nonbraided networks. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 40(4):937–946

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houck O (2002) Clean water act TMDL program: law, policy, and implementation, 2nd edn. The Environmental Law Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Ilieve P, Miller A, Kramer W, Bryan J (2001) Mapping of water quality standards to the national hydrography dataset. In: Proceedings of the ESRI user conference 2001, San Diego, CA, July 9–13

  • Karr J, Yoder C (2004) Biological assessment and criteria improve total maximum daily load decision making. Journal of Environmental Engineering 130(6):594–604

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Laitta M, Legleiter K, Hanson K (2004). The national watershed boundary dataset. Hydro Line, Summer 2004, p 1. ESRI Water Resources Group. Available from http://www.esri.com/library/newsletters/hydroline/hydroline_summer2004.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • Lanfear K (1990) A fast algorithm for automatically computing Strahler stream order. Water Resources Bulletin Resources 26(6):977–981

    Google Scholar 

  • Lieber H (1975) Federalism and clean waters: the 1972 water pollution control act. Lexington Books/D.C. Heath, Lexington, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • McCartney E (2010) Fundamentals of stewardship for the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD). In: Proceedings of the 2010 AWRA summer specialty conference, GIS and water resources VI, Orlando, Florida, March, 29–31, 2010. American Water Resources Association, Middleburg, VA

  • McKay C, DeWald T (2010) NHDPlus Version 2.0. In: Proceedings of the 2010 AWRA summer specialty conference, GIS and water resources VI, Orlando, Florida, March, 29–31, 2010. American Water Resources Association, Middleburg, VA

  • Milazzo PC (2006) Unlikely environmentalists: congress and clean water, 1945–1972. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadeau T, Rains M (2007) Hydrological connectivity between headwater streams and downstream waters: how science can inform policy. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43(1):118–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norton D, Abdelmajid N, Olsen A, Kratt K (2009) Sampling TMDL implementation rates and patterns in the north central US. TMDL 2009: combining science and management to restore impaired waters, Minneapolis, MN, August 9–12, 2009. Water Environment Federation, Alexandria, VA

  • NRC (National Research Council) (1992) Restoration of aquatic ecosystems. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC (National Research Council) (2001) Assessing the TMDL approach to water quality management. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC (National Research Council) (2008) Mississippi River water quality and the clean water act: progress, challenges, and opportunities. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley A, Leopold L (1998) Restoring streams in cities: a guide for planners, policymakers, and citizens. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Rineer J, Miller A, Sinnott J, Plastino M (2004) WebRIT: an EPA enterprise tool for Web-based locational data improvement. In: Proceedings of the 24th annual ESRI international user’s conference, San Diego, CA, August 9–13, 2004. ESRI, Redlands, CA

  • RTI International (2009) Comprehensive Livestock Environmental Assessment and Nutrient Management Plan Program supporting owners and operators of livestock and poultry operations in the Eastern United States (CLEANEAST). EPA Cooperative Agreement EM-83375401-0. RTI International and North Carolina State University with the US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management, Washington, DC. Available from http://livestock.rti.org. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • Simley J (2008) Applying the national hydrography dataset. Water Resources Impact 10(1):5–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Spoerri C, Miller A, Dabolt T (2000) The reach indexing tool for the national hydrography dataset: functionality and impacts on state water programs. In: Proceedings of the ESRI user conference 2000, San Diego, CA, June 26–30

  • Upper Mississippi River Basin Association (2006) Organizational options for interstate water quality management on the upper Mississippi River. Upper Mississippi River Basin Association and the McKnight Foundation, St. Paul, MN. Available from http://www.umrba.org/wq/orgoptions12-06.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US Census Bureau (2009) 2008 TIGER/Line shapefiles. U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Washington, DC. Available at http://www2.census.gov/cgi-bin/shapefiles/national-files. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (1986) Stream sampling for wasteload allocations. EPA 625-6-86-013. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. Available from www.epa.gov/waterscience/models/library/streamsampling.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2000) Atlas of America’s polluted waters. EPA 840-B-00-002. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office Water, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2002) Ecoregional nutrient criteria. EPA-822-F-02-008. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Available from http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nutrient/ecoregions/index.html. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2006) Wadeable streams assessment: a collaborative survey of the nation’s streams. EPA 841-B-06-002. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. Available at www.epa.gov/owow/streamsurvey. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2007) Level III ecoregions of the continental United States (map). Western Ecology Division, Corvallis, OR. Available from http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii.htm. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2008a) Handbook for developing watershed TMDLs. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds, Washington, DC. Available from http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/pdf/draft_handbook.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2008b) National meeting of large aquatic ecosystem program managers: meeting report. October 22–23, 2007, St. Louis, MO. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Available from http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/pdf/large_aquatic_ecosystems_report.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2009a) Better Assessment Science Integrating point and Non-point Sources (BASINS): Metadata. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Available from http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/basins/metadata.htm. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2009b) National aquatic resource surveys: a progress report. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. Available from http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/pdf/narsprogress.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2009c) The Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico watershed nutrient task force: FY 2009 annual operating plan. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. Available from http://www.epa.gov/msbasin/pdf/fy09_actionplan_200805.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • US GAO (Government Accountability Office) (2000) Water quality: key EPA and state decisions limited by inconsistent and incomplete data. GAO/RCED-00-54. US General Accounting Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • US GAO (Government Accountability Office) (2002) Water quality: inconsistent state approaches complicate nation’s efforts to identify its most polluted waters. GAO-02–186. US General Accounting Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • USGS (US Geological Survey) (2007) A national water quality monitoring network for U.S. coastal waters and their tributaries. Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI) and the National Water Quality Monitoring Council. Available from http://acwi.gov/monitoring/network/network_brochure.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • USGS (US Geological Survey) (2009a) NHDPlus user guide. US Geological Survey and US Environmental Protection Agency. Available from ftp://ftp.horizon-systems.com/NHDPlus/documentation/NHDPLUS_UserGuide.doc. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • USGS (US Geological Survey) (2009b) National atlas of the United States, state boundaries of the United States. Available from http://www.nationalatlas.gov/mld/statesp.html and http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/metadata/usgswrd/XML/states2m.xml. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • USGS (US Geological Survey) (2009c) NHD tools: NHD ArcView toolkit. Available from http://nhd.usgs.gov/tools.html. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • USGS (US Geological Survey) (2009d) Geographic Names Information System—GNIS. Available from http://nhd.usgs.gov/gnis.html. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • USGS (US Geological Survey) and USDA (US Department of Agriculture (2009) Federal guidelines, requirements, and procedures for the national watershed boundary dataset. US geological survey techniques and methods 11–A3. US Geological Survey and US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, US Geological Survey, Reston, VA. Available from ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NCGC/products/watershed/hu-standards.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2010

  • Van Zandt FK (1976) Boundaries of the United States and the several states. Geological survey professional paper 909. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge RTI’s Professional Development Award (PDA) program for support in the preparation of this manuscript. RTI PDA awards are made on a competitive basis to ensure a continuing high level of professional staff performance. Support in the development of submission of articles to major publications is one of the primary uses of these PDA awards.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RTI International, 3040 Cornwallis Road, P.O. Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, USA

    William Cooter, James Rineer & Brandon Bergenroth

Authors
  1. William Cooter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James Rineer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brandon Bergenroth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William Cooter.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cooter, W., Rineer, J. & Bergenroth, B. A Nationally Consistent NHDPlus Framework for Identifying Interstate Waters: Implications for Integrated Assessments and Interjurisdictional TMDLs. Environmental Management 46, 510–524 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9526-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9526-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation