DOCSLIB.ORG

Shoreline Types of the Upper Texas Coast: Sabine-Galveston-Freeport-Sargent Areas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shoreline Types of the Upper Texas Coast: Sabine-Galveston-Freeport-Sargent Areas Shoreline Types of the Upper Texas Coast: Sabine-Galveston-Freeport-Sargent Areas Final Report Prepared for the Texas Natural Resources"Inventory Program Texas General Land Office, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department under GLO Contract No. 94-177R and Minerals Management Service Gulfwide Information System at Louisiana State University CMJ-30660-19901 Robert A. Morton and William A. White Bureau of Economic Geology Noel Tyler, Director The U:niversity of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78713-8924 January 1995 CON1ENTS Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Rationale for Updating Shoreline Inventories and ESI Maps ......................................................... 3 Previous Related Work ................................................................................................................... 6 Methods of Mapping and Applying ESI Rankings ......................................................................... 8 Mapping Procedures ................................................................................................................. 8 .. 0 Application ofESI Rankings to Complex Shorelines ............................................................. 13 Delineation of Wetlands Using NWI Data ............................................................................. 13 Field Verification and Modifications ...................................................................................... 14 Quality Control ....................................................................................................................... 15 Shoreline Types of the Upper Texas Coast ................................................................................... 16 Coastal Structures ................................................................................................................... 18 Clay and Sand Scarps and Steep Slopes ................................................................................. 20 Wave-cut Clay Platforms ........................................................................................................ 22 . Fine-grained Sand Beaches ..................................................................................................... 23 Coarse-grained Sand Beaches ................................................................................................. 25 Mixed Sand and Gravel (Shell) Beaches ................................................................................ 26 Gravel (Shell) Beaches ............................................................................................................ 27 Exposed Tidal Flats ................................................................................................................. 29 Sheltered Tidal Flats ............................................................................................................... 30 Salt- and Brackish-water Marsh .............................................................................................. 32 Fresh-water Marsh .................................................................................................................. 33 Fresh-water Swamps ............................................................................................................... 35 Examples of Multiple Shoreline Types and Their ESI Rankings ................................................. 36 Tree-Lined Marshes (10B/10C) .............................................................................................. 36 Marshes Bordered By Low Wave-Cut Clay Scarps (lON2A) ............................................... 37 111 Marshes Bordered by Perched Beaches and Clay Platforms (lOA/5/2B) ............................... 38 Shell Berms, Clay Scarps, and Marshes (1OA/6A!2A) ........................................................... 38 Sandy Washover Terraces and Marshes (10A/3A) ................................................................. 39 ScarpsLined by Bulkheads and Riprap (2A/1 and 3B/1) ....................................................... 40 Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... 40 References ..................................................................................................................................... 41 Figures 1. Index map of the study area showing the locations of 7.5-minute U.S.G.S. topographic maps ......................................................................................... , ........................ 4 2. Examples of coastal structures (a) exposed vertical seawall at Galveston with riprap and piers, and (b) typical port facilities wi):h bulkheads and riprap such as this refinery at Baytown ............................................................................................................. 11 3. Multiple shoreline types consisting of exposed bulkheads and riprap. The shorelines are classified as l/6B or 6B/l depending on whether the bulkhead is landward (a) or seaward (b) of the riprap ..................................................................................................... 13 4. Examples of scarps composed of (a) clay and (b) sand ...................................................... 21 5. Example of a wave-cut clay platform ................................................................................. 23 6. Example of a fine-grained sand beach ................................................................................ 24 7. Example of a mixed sand and gravel (shell) beach ............................................................. 26 8. Example of gravel (shell) beaches ...................................................................................... 28 9. Example of an exposed tidal flat. ........................................................................................ 29 10. Example of a sheltered tidal flat ...................................................................... ,.................. 31 11. Example of a salt- and brackish-water marsh ..................................................................... 32 12. Example of a fresh-water marsh ......................................................................................... 34 13. Example of a fresh-water swamp ........................................................................................ 35 14. Multiple shoreline types consisting of fresh-water marsh and wetland trees lining the shore .................................................................................................................................... 37 15. Multiple shoreline types consisting of marshes, a clay scarp, perched beach, and a wave- cut platform ......................................................................................................................... 38 16. Multiple shoreline types consisting of a marsh, shell berm, and clay scarp ....................... 39 IV 17. Multiple shoreline types consisting of a marsh and sand washover deposit. ...................... 39 18. Multiple shoreline types consisting of a clay scarp and failing bulkhead .......................... 40 Tables 1. List of 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles used for the upper Texas coast ....................... 5 2. Standardized ESI Rankings for Texas .................................................................................. 9 3. Annotated and combined ESI Rankings for Texas ............................................................. 10 4. Date, type, source, and geographic coverage of high- and low-altitude vertical aerial photographs used to map shorelines ................................................................................... 12 5. General relationship between NWI wetland classes and ESI wetland types ...................... 14 v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following report describes how the Bureau of Economic Geology (BEG) classified and mapped the shores of the upper Texas coast for the Texas Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) Program, provides defmitions of each shoreline type, and presents examples that illustrate how physical attributes of the shoreline habitats control the impact of spilled oil. This infonnation is an integral part of the Environmental Sensitivity Index (ES!) maps used for oil spill response and contingency planning. Shorelines were classified according to an ESI scheme established by Research Planning, Inc. (RP!) and the BEG. The ESI rankings (1-10) are described, examples of each type are illustrated, and the common occurrences of multiple adjacent shoreline types are given. Shoreline types were mapped on U.S.G.S. topographic quadrangles (1:24,000) using recent vertical aerial photographs, low-altitude color video surveys taken in 1992, oblique color slides taken in 1992 and 1994,an overflight in 1994, and previous field experience. All the maps were field checked in June 1994 from the air and some sites were checked on the ground. The Sabine to Sargent region was selected for the initial phase ofESI mapping in Texas because shore types there are diverse, it is densely industrialized, extant wetlands are environmentally sensitive, and a large volume of oil is transported through major shipping channels
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 125Th Anniversary of the Battle of Sabine Pass.” Texas Gulf Historical & Biographical Record 24, No
    “125th Anniversary of the Battle of Sabine Pass.” Texas Gulf Historical & Biographical Record 24, no. 1 (November 1988): 71–78. doi:Article. Ahlstrom, Richard Mather. Texas Civil War Artifacts: A Photographic Guide to the Physical Culture of Texas Civil War Soldiers. Denton, Tex: University of North Texas Press, 2008. Ashcraft, Allan C. “Fort Brown, Texas, in 1861.” Texas Military History 3 (1963). ———. “Texas in the Confederacy: Military Installations, Economy and People.” Southwestern Historical Quarterly 83, no. 4 (April 1980): 427–28. doi:Book Review. ———. “The Union Occupation of the Lower Rio Grande Valley in the Civil War.” Texas Military History 8, no. 4 (1970). Bell, Andrew Mcllwaine. “Trans-Mississippi Miasmas: How Malaria & Yellow Fever Shaped the Course of the Civil War in the Confederacy’s Western Theater.” East Texas Historical Journal 48, no. 2 (2009): 3–13. doi:Article. Bell, Walter F. “Civil War Texas: A Review of the Historical Literature.” Southwestern Historical Quarterly 109, no. 2 (October 2005): 205–32. doi:Article. Case, Robert. “La Frontera Texana Y Los Movimientos De Insurreccion En Mexico - 1850- 1900.” Historia Mexicana 30, no. 3 (January 1981): 415–52. doi:Article. Cerutti, Marío, and Miguel González Quiroga. “Guerra Y Comercio En Torno Al Rio Bravo (1855-1867). Linea Fronteriza, Espacio Economico Comun. (spanish).” Historia Mexicana 40, no. 2 (October 1990): 217–97. doi:Article. Clendenen, Clarence C. Blood on the Border; the United States Army and the Mexican Irregulars. New York: Macmillan, 1969. ———. “Mexican Unionists: A Forgotten Incident of the War Between States.” New Mexico Historical Review 39, no. 1 (Winter1964 1964): 32–39.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Nontraditional Soil and Aggregate Stabilizers the University of Texas at Austin Authors: Alan F
    CENTER FOR TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN Project Summary Report 7-1993-S Center for Transportation Research Project 7-1993: Evaluation of Nontraditional Soil and Aggregate Stabilizers The University of Texas at Austin Authors: Alan F. Rauch, Lynn E. Katz, and Howard M. Liljestrand May 2003 EVALUATION OF NONTRADITIONAL SOIL AND AGGREGATE STABILIZERS: A SUMMARY and at ten times the recommended tography (GPC), UV/Vis spectroscopy, Introduction application rates. These tests failed to and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) Proprietary chemical products are show significant, consistent changes spectroscopy. In some cases, we syn- marketed by a number of companies for in the engineering properties of the thesized the stabilizer components in stabilizing pavement base and subgrade test soils following treatment with the the laboratory or purchased them from soils. Usually supplied as concentrated three selected products at the applica- other chemical supply companies to liquids, these products are diluted in tion rates used. verify our conclusions. water on the project site and sprayed The three stabilizer products were on the soil to be treated prior to mix- What We Did... then reacted with three reference clays ing and compaction. If effective, these We began by selecting three and five native Texas clay soils. We products might be used as alternatives commercially available, liquid soil tested samples of the well-character- for treating sulfate-rich soils, which are stabilizer products for evaluation. ized, reference clays (kaolinite, illite, susceptible to excessive heaving when Although no effort was made to as- and montmorillonite) to increase the treated with traditional, calcium-based semble and classify a comprehensive likelihood of observing subtle physi- stabilizers such as lime, cement, and fly list of available products and suppliers, cal-chemical changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Disaster Recovery of Public Housing in Galveston, Texas: an Opportunity for Whom?
    2019 INQUIRY CASE STUDY STUDY CASE INQUIRY Post-Disaster Recovery of Public Housing in Galveston, Texas: An Opportunity for Whom? JANE RONGERUDE AND SARA HAMIDEH LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY 1 TOPICS Disaster Recovery, Social Vulnerability Factors, Post-Disaster Planning, Public Housing Replacement Strategies TIMEFRAME 2008–2014 LEARNING GOALS • Understand the concept of social vulnerability and the role of its factors in shaping post-disaster recovery outcomes • Analyze examples to identify post-disaster recovery goals and to explain disparities in recovery outcomes among both public housing residents and units • Develop criteria for evaluating post-disaster recovery planning strategies to ensure fairness and inclusiveness • Analyze the goals and strategies for replacing affordable housing after disasters from different stakeholders’ perspectives PRIMARY AUDIENCE Planning students and housing officials PREREQUISITE KNOWLEDGE This case study assumes that readers have a foundational understanding of the concept of social vulnerability, which provides a framework for evaluating a community’s resilience and for understanding the ability of particular groups to anticipate, withstand, and recover from shocks such as natural disasters. This concept acknowledges that disaster risk is not distributed evenly across a population or a place. Because poor neighborhoods overall have fewer resources and more limited social and political capital than their more affluent counterparts, they face greater challenges in post-disaster recovery. Damage due to natural disasters is modulated by social factors such as income, race, ethnicity, religion, age, health, and disability status. Because poor people are more likely to live in low-quality housing, they are at greater risk for damage from high winds, waves, flooding, or tremors (Peacock et al.
    [Show full text]
  • San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: a Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan
    Volume 2002 Article 3 2002 San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan I. Waynne Cox Steve A. Tomka Raba Kistner, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita Part of the American Material Culture Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Environmental Studies Commons, Other American Studies Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, and the United States History Commons Tell us how this article helped you. Cite this Record Cox, I. Waynne and Tomka, Steve A. (2002) "San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan," Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 2002, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.21112/ita.2002.1.3 ISSN: 2475-9333 Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2002/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Regional Heritage Research at SFA ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State by an authorized editor of SFA ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License This article is available in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2002/iss1/3 San Jacinto Battleground State Historical Park A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan by I.
    [Show full text]
  • THE LYNCHBURG VOLUNTEERS 1 2 3 by Trevia Wooster Beverly, Bernice Mistrot, and Mike Vance ©Baytown Historical Preservation Association4
    An Application for a Texas Historical Marker Presented to the Harris County Historical Commission – September 12, 2016 THE LYNCHBURG VOLUNTEERS 1 2 3 by Trevia Wooster Beverly, Bernice Mistrot, and Mike Vance ©Baytown Historical Preservation Association4 “The people of Texas do now constitute a free, sovereign and independent republic.”5 PREFACE6 From the colonial era until today, America has depended upon citizen soldiers in times of crisis requiring a military response. These men—and now women—set aside their personal and professional affairs to join or form military organizations. And, once the crisis was resolved, resumed their civilian occupations until they were again needed as soldiers. This was especially a characteristic of frontiersmen, one which they carried with them In the 1820’s and 1830’s as their line of settlement moved beyond the western border of the United States of America into the Spanish and then Mexican territory of Texas. I. CONTEXT 7 The area now known as Baytown was home to many who, arriving as early as 1822, would 8 9 become active in the struggle for Texas independence that culminated in 1836. Nathaniel Lynch, for whom the town of Lynchburg is named, arrived in Texas in the summer of 1822 with his wife and three children. On his one-league Mexican land grant, he established a trading post and a sawmill. 10 Together with Arthur McCormick, he operated the Lynchburg Ferry, which has been in continuous 11 12 operation since 1822. David Gouverneur Burnet brought a steam sawmill to the area in 1831. Midway Landing was not a town speculation, but the dock area on Black Duck Bay at the plantation 13 14 of William Scott, who had purchased the land from John D.
    [Show full text]
  • Storm Surge and the Future of the Houston Ship
    Storm Surge and the Future of the Houston Ship Channel By Jim Blackburn, SSPEED Center, Rice University Excerpted from work-in-progress with Amy Jaffe, Council on Foreign Relations The Houston Ship Channel and Galveston Bay are home to eight major refineries and over 200 chemical plants producing a variety of plastics and other synthetic products. This industrial infrastructure provides about 12% of U.S. refining capacity, produces about 27% of the nation’s jet fuel and an even larger percentage of military-grade jet fuel, about 13% of the nation’s gasoline, and about 25% of the U.S. production of ethylene/propylene. This is a key region for U.S. national security as well as for the Texas and Houston-area economies. Unfortunately, this petrochemical complex is at significant risk of long- term catastrophic failure due to the potential impact of hurricane storm surge. Over the last 100 years, severe hurricanes with substantial surge have missed the Houston region. Galveston was destroyed by a major hurricane in 1900, about the time that oil and gas was discovered on the Texas coast. The major development of the Houston Ship Channel industrial complex lagged behind that oil discovery in Spindletop by at least two decades and experienced major growth and expansion before and after World War II. To date, the largest surge recorded up the Houston Ship Channel was from Hurricane Ike in 2008 and Hurricane Carla in 1961, and neither of those storms generated more than about thirteen to fourteen feet of surge up the channel, a level that can generally be accommodated by these industries.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep-Water Bottom Dropping Page 6 FISHING
    Doves usher in a new season * September 12, 2008 Texas’ Premier Outdoor Newspaper Volume 5, Issue 2 * Report on Page 6 www.lonestaroutdoornews.com INSIDE Flyway rivalry prompts HUNTING Texas’ dove research Timing of hunt causes stir among hunters BY CRAIG NYHUS on doves. A team was out two days prior to the hunting season to collect Dove hunters in Texas have long bird specimens for a study compar- feared a federal requirement for the ing the effectiveness of lead and non- use of nonlead shot to pursue their lead shot. But some outfitters and hunters were taken aback by the early Grayson County has become quarry. The state holds the same con- cerns, especially after other states in shooting. famous for its big bucks in the the Central Flyway tried to force Texas Parks and Wildlife biologists state’s lone archery-only Texas to require nonlead shot based are in the first year of a multi-year county. A petition to modify on their waterfowl studies, according study to determine the effectiveness the archery-only rule has many GUNNING FOR RESEARCH: Using volunteer hunters, TPW biologists are to officials. of different load types on wild hunters up in arms. conducting a three-year study of shot effectiveness on dove, but the early That was the genesis of Texas’ own mourning doves using trained Page 7 hunt caused a PR nightmare for officials. Photo by TPW. study on the effect of nonlead shot See DOVE, Page 16 Teal are arriving on schedule along the Texas coast in time for the early season.
    [Show full text]
  • Galveston, Texas
    Galveston, Texas 1 TENTATIVE ITINERARY Participants may arrive at beach house as early as 8am Beach geology, history, and seawall discussions/walkabout Drive to Galveston Island State Park, Pier 21 and Strand, Apffel Park, and Seawolf Park Participants choice! Check-out of beach house by 11am Activities may continue after check-out 2 GEOLOGIC POINTS OF INTEREST Barrier island formation, shoreface, swash zone, beach face, wrack line, berm, sand dunes, seawall construction and history, sand composition, longshore current and littoral drift, wavelengths and rip currents, jetty construction, Town Mountain Granite geology Beach foreshore, backshore, dunes, lagoon and tidal flats, back bay, salt marsh wetlands, prairie, coves and bayous, Pelican Island, USS Cavalla and USS Stewart, oil and gas drilling and production exhibits, 1877 tall ship ELISSA Bishop’s Palace, historic homes, Pleasure Pier, Tremont Hotel, Galveston Railroad Museum, Galveston’s Own Farmers Market, ArtWalk 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS • Barrier Island System Maps • Jetty/Breakwater • Formation of Galveston Island • Riprap • Barrier Island Diagrams • Town Mountain Granite (Galveston) • Coastal Dunes • Source of Beach and River Sands • Lower Shoreface • Sand Management • Middle Shoreface • Upper Shoreface • Foreshore • Prairie • Backshore • Salt Marsh Wetlands • Dunes • Lagoon and Tidal Flats • Pelican Island • Seawolf Park • Swash Zone • USS Stewart (DE-238) • Beach Face • USS Cavalla (SS-244) • Wrack Line • Berm • Longshore Current • 1877 Tall Ship ELISSA • Littoral Zone • Overview
    [Show full text]
  • Isotropic Work Softening Model for Frictional
    Yang, K.-H., Nogueira, C., and Zornberg, J.G. (2008). “Isotropic Work Softening Model for Frictional Geomaterials: Development Based on Lade and Kim soil Constitutive Model.” Proceedings of the XXIX Iberian Latin American Congress on Computational Methods in Engineering, CILAMCE 2008, Maceio, Brazil, November 4-7, pp. 1-17 (CD-ROM). ISOTROPIC WORK SOFTENING MODEL FOR FRICTIONAL GEOMATERIALS: DEVELOPMENT BASED ON LADE AND KIM CONSTITUTIVE SOIL MODEL Kuo-Hsin Yang [email protected] Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Texas, Austin, USA Christianne de Lyra Nogueira [email protected] Dept. of Mine Engineering, Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil Jorge G. Zornberg [email protected] Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Texas, Austin, USA Abstract: An isotropic softening model for predicting the post-peak behavior of frictional geomaterials is presented. The proposed softening model is a function of plastic work which can include all possible stress-strain combinations. The development of softening model is based on the Lade and Kim constitutive soil model but improves previous work by characterizing the size of decaying yield surface more realistically by assuming an inverse sigmoid function. Compared to original softening model using the exponential decay function, the benefits of using the inverse sigmoid function are highlighted as: (1) provide a smoother transition from hardening to softening occurring at the peak strength point, and (2) limit the decrease of yield surface at a residual yield surface, which is a minimum size of yield surface during softening. The proposed softening model requires three parameters; each parameter has it own physical meaning and can be easily calibrated by a triaxial compression test.
    [Show full text]
  • Sabine River Basin Summary Report 2018
    Sabine River Basin Summary Report 2018 Prepared in Cooperation with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality The preparation of this report was financed in part through funding from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Sabine River Authority of Texas P.O. Box 579 Orange, TX 77631 Phone (409) 746-2192 Fax (409) 746-3780 Sabine Basin 2018 Summary Report Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 3 The TCRP and SRA-TX Objectives ................................................................................................... 4 Public Involvement ................................................................................................................................ 6 Water Quality Review ........................................................................................................................... 7 Water Quality Terminology ................................................................................................................ 8 Data Review Methodology ............................................................................................................... 10 Watershed Summaries .................................................................................................................... 12 Segment 0501 - Sabine River Tidal ............................................................................................. 12 Segment 0502 - Sabine River Above Tidal
    [Show full text]
  • Sabine Lake Galveston Bay East Matagorda Bay Matagorda Bay Corpus Christi Bay Aransas Bay San Antonio Bay Laguna Madre Planning
    River Basins Brazos River Basin Brazos-Colorado Coastal Basin TPWD Canadian River Basin Dallam Sherman Hansford Ochiltree Wolf Creek Colorado River Basin Lipscomb Gene Howe WMA-W.A. (Pat) Murphy Colorado-Lavaca Coastal Basin R i t Strategic Planning a B r ve Gene Howe WMA l i Hartley a Hutchinson R n n Cypress Creek Basin Moore ia Roberts Hemphill c ad a an C C r e Guadalupe River Basin e k Lavaca River Basin Oldham r Potter Gray ive Regions Carson ed R the R ork of Wheeler Lavaca-Guadalupe Coastal Basin North F ! Amarillo Neches River Basin Salt Fork of the Red River Deaf Smith Armstrong 10Randall Donley Collingsworth Palo Duro Canyon Neches-Trinity Coastal Basin Playa Lakes WMA-Taylor Unit Pr airie D og To Nueces River Basin wn Fo rk of t he Red River Parmer Playa Lakes WMA-Dimmit Unit Swisher Nueces-Rio Grande Coastal Basin Castro Briscoe Hall Childress Caprock Canyons Caprock Canyons Trailway N orth P Red River Basin ease River Hardeman Lamb Rio Grande River Basin Matador WMA Pease River Bailey Copper Breaks Hale Floyd Motley Cottle Wilbarger W To Wichita hi ng ver Sabine River Basin te ue R Foard hita Ri er R ive Wic Riv i r Wic Clay ta ve er hita hi Pat Mayse WMA r a Riv Rive ic Eisenhower ichit r e W h W tl Caddo National Grassland-Bois D'arc 6a Nort Lit San Antonio River Basin Lake Arrowhead Lamar Red River Montague South Wichita River Cooke Grayson Cochran Fannin Hockley Lubbock Lubbock Dickens King Baylor Archer T ! Knox rin Bonham North Sulphur San Antonio-Nueces Coastal Basin Crosby r it River ive y R Bowie R B W iv os r es
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Management Program 2013-2018 Appendix A
    Appendix A 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) As required under Sections 303(d) and 304(a) of the federal Clean Water Act, this list identifies the water bodies in or bordering Texas for which effluent limitations are not stringent enough to implement water quality standards, and for which the associated pollutants are suitable for measurement by maximum daily load. In addition, the TCEQ also develops a schedule identifying Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that will be initiated in the next two years for priority impaired waters. Issuance of permits to discharge into 303(d)-listed water bodies is described in the TCEQ regulatory guidance document Procedures to Implement the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (January 2003, RG-194). Impairments are limited to the geographic area described by the Assessment Unit and identified with a six or seven-digit AU_ID. A TMDL for each impaired parameter will be developed to allocate pollutant loads from contributing sources that affect the parameter of concern in each Assessment Unit. The TMDL will be identified and counted using a six or seven-digit AU_ID. Water Quality permits that are issued before a TMDL is approved will not increase pollutant loading that would contribute to the impairment identified for the Assessment Unit. Explanation of Column Headings SegID and Name: The unique identifier (SegID), segment name, and location of the water body. The SegID may be one of two types of numbers. The first type is a classified segment number (4 digits, e.g., 0218), as defined in Appendix A of the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (TSWQS).
    [Show full text]