Comparison of FDEP and EPA Numeric Nutrient Criteria Coverage

FDEP GIS Data Review
Numeric Nutrient Criteria
February 2013

Table of Contents
OVERVIEW…………………………………………………………………………… 1
SUMMARY MAPS
Florida’s Numeric Nutrient Criteria Coverage February 2013…………………………. 2
Potential EPA Numeric Nutrient Criteria Coverage February 2013……………………. 3
Goal of Florida’s Numeric Nutrient Criteria Coverage ………………………………… 4
DETAILED MAPS and GIS METHOD OVERVIEW………………………………. 5
i

Overview
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) methods and coverages provided the best available
methods to calculate and depict different Class III waterbody types to which the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Numeric Nutrient Criteria (NNC) rules apply. The National Hydrography
Dataset (NHD) is a database that depicts the nation’s surface waters. It contains features such as
lakes, ponds, streams, rivers, and canals and is designed to be used in general mapping and in the
analysis of surface water systems. FDEP used a December 12, 2012, release of the 1:24,000
resolution NHD GIS base layer for this analysis. This data set is the standard surface water GIS
layer in use for Florida’s Water Management Districts, FDEP, and the State Emergency
Response Team. The base layer was used in conjunction with other spatial data layers, such as
soils, land use and salinity to conduct this analysis.
Using ESRI’s ArcMap version 10.0 GIS software, FDEP GIS staff performed spatial analysis to
generate data layers that would most accurately represent surface water resources related to the
respective FDEP and EPA NNC rules. The resultant coverages were exchanged via FTP sites
with GIS staff for EPA. On January 17, 2013 a consultant for EPA met with Tallahassee staff
and participated in a joint LIVE MEETING session with EPA staff in Washington DC and
Atlanta. During this meeting, all the details of the GIS methodology were discussed and
reviewed. DEP staff incorporated several EPA suggestions in a revised methodology and recreated
several layers such as Freshwater Lakes. The following maps represent DEP’s depiction
and areal estimate of the Department’s established and the EPA proposed NNC Summary Maps.
Page 1

Page 2

Page 3

Page 4

DETAILED MAPS and GIS METHOD OVERVIEW
GIS Analysis Resource Totals
FDEP NNC Coverage
Waterbody Type
Area
FDEP Inland Flowing Waters 347 mi. 2
FDEP Fresh Water Lakes 2,548 mi. 2
FDEP Estuaries 6,979 mi. 2
FDEP Wetlands 2,300 mi. 2
FDEP Total 12,174 mi. 2
Proposed EPA NNC Coverage
Waterbody Type
Area
EPA Tidal Creeks (proposed) 164 mi. 2
EPA Marine Lakes (proposed) 4 mi. 2
EPA Estuaries and Coastal (proposed) 5,746 mi. 2
EPA Inland Flowing Waters that are Likely Candidates for Stream Exception 24 mi. 2
EPA Total 5,937 mi. 2
Florida’s Goal
Waterbody Type
Area
Inland Flowing Waters 347 mi. 2
Fresh Water Lakes 2,548 mi. 2
Estuaries and Coastal 11,234 mi. 2
Wetlands 2,300 mi. 2
Total 16,429 mi. 2
Page 5

GIS Spatial Data Inventory
FDEP Wetland NNC - Depicts the area to which the Everglades phosphorus criterion is
applicable.
Page 6

FDEP Estuarine NNC - Depicts the areas to which FDEP estuarine NNC are applicable.
Individual estuaries were combined and overlapping areas were removed to avoid duplication.
Page 7

FDEP Freshwater Lakes NNC - Depicts the areas to which FDEP lakes NNC are applicable.
The analysis was conducted using the December 2012 24K NHD. All lakes, ponds and
reservoirs were selected, regardless of size. Only the areas in Florida were counted for lakes
straddling the Florida/Georgia or Alabama borders. Waterbodies such as swimming pools,
ornamental ponds and fountains were excluded. Any areas overlapping areas to which FDEP
estuary, FDEP wetlands, EPA estuary, EPA coastal segment, EPA offshore (Big Bend), EPA
marine lake, or FDEP marine lake NNC apply were excluded.
Page 8

FDEP Estuary and EPA Marine Lake NNC - Depicts the areas to which FDEP estuary and
EPA marine lake NNC are applicable. The analysis was conducted using a marine lakes GIS
layer from EPA. FDEP staff conducted a detailed review of each marine lake. Lakes determined
not to be marine or not to be a lake were excluded. The remaining lakes were divided into lakes
for which either EPA’s marine lake NNC apply or were covered by one of FDEP’s estuarine
NNC.
Page 9

FDEP South Nutrient Watershed Region - Depicts the South Nutrient Watershed Region, for
which neither FDEP nor EPA NNC are applicable at this time. FDEP is conducting extensive
research to develop NNC for this area. This area is not included in either the estimate of FDEP
or EPA NNC.
Page 10

FDEP Inland Flowing Waters NNC - Depicts the areas to which FDEP inland flowing waters
NNC are applicable. The analysis was conducted using the December 2012 24K NHD. This
coverage is a result of a merger between FDEP’s stream and river coverage and EPA’s inland
canal and ditch coverage. All features were selected and only the areas in Florida were counted
for waters straddling the Florida/Georgia or Alabama borders. Features identified as potentially
Class IV waterbodies were excluded. Features that overlapped areas to which freshwater lake,
marine lake or estuarine NNC apply were excluded to avoid double counting. Features seaward
of the saltwater interface were also excluded to avoid double-counting.
Page 11

EPA Tidal Creeks NNC - Depicts the areas to which EPA tidal creek NNC are applicable.
The analysis was conducted using a tidal creek GIS coverage obtained from EPA.
Segments that lie inside the area determined by FDEP as tidal creeks (see FDEP inland flowing
waters section for description of method) were selected. Segments were excluded that
overlapped areas to which estuarine NNC apply to avoid double counting.
Page 12

EPA Estuarine NNC - Depicts the areas to which EPA’s proposed estuarine NNC are
applicable. The analysis was conducted using an estuarine NNC GIS coverage obtained from
EPA. Any areas overlapping an area to which FDEP estuarine NNC apply were excluded to
avoid double counting.
Page 13

EPA Coastal Segments - Depicts the areas to which EPA’s proposed coastal NNC are
applicable. The analysis was conducted using a coastal NNC GIS coverage obtained from EPA.
Any areas overlapping an area to which FDEP Estuarine NNC apply were excluded to avoid
double counting.
Page 14

EPA Big Bend Offshore Segments Depicts the areas to which EPA’s proposed Big Bend
offshore NNC are applicable. The analysis was conducted using a Big Bend offshore NNC GIS
coverage obtained from EPA. Any areas overlapping an area to which FDEP Estuarine NNC
apply were excluded to avoid double counting.
Page 15

EPA Inland Flowing Waters that are Likely Candidates to meet the provisions of 62-
302.200(36)(a) and (b) 1 - Depicts the areas to which FDEP NNC may not be applicable due to
being a: 1) tidal creek (flowing waters inland of the saltwater interface to the 3.2 mi. buffer); or
2) man-made or physically altered ditch, canal or other conveyance. These waters are those with
either sufficient water quality data for assessment under the FDEP impaired waters rule, or those
with an NPDES discharge.
1 Flowing waters that meet the provisions in Subsection 62-302.200(36)(a) and (b), F.A.C.
Page 16