Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · ofr20151080

Methods for evaluating potential sources of chloride in surface waters and groundwaters of the conterminous United States

Abstract

Chloride exists as a major ion in most natural waters, but many anthropogenic sources are increasing concentrations of chloride in many receiving waters. Although natural concentrations in continental waters can be as high as 200,000 milligrams per liter, chloride concentrations that are suitable for freshwater ecology, human consumption, and agricultural and industrial water uses commonly are on the order of 10 to 1,000 milligrams per liter. “Road salt” frequently is identified as the sole source of anthropogenic chloride, but only about 30 percent of the salt consumed and released to the environment is used for deicing. Furthermore, several studies in Southern States where the use of deicing salt is minimal also show anthropogenic chloride in rising concentrations and in strong correlation to imperviousness and road density. This is because imperviousness and road density also are strongly correlated to population density. The term “road salt” is a misnomer because deicers applied to parking lots, sidewalks, and driveways can be a substantial source of chloride in some catchments because these land covers are comparable to roadways as a percentage of the total impervious area and commonly receive higher salt application rates than some roadways. Other sources of anthropogenic chloride include wastewater, dust control on unpaved roads, fertilizer, animal waste, irrigation, aquaculture, energy production wastes, and landfill leachates. The assumption that rising chloride concentrations in surface water or groundwater is indicative of contamination by deicing chemicals rather than one or more other potential sources may preclude the identification of toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic, or endocrine-disrupting contaminants that are associated with many sources of elevated chloride concentrations. Once the sources of anthropogenic chloride in an area of interest have been identified and measured, water and solute budgets can be estimated to guide decisionmakers to identify and apply potential mitigation measures that can reduce the problem. Scientists, engineers, regulators, and decisionmakers need information about potential sources of chloride, water and solute budgets, and methods for collecting water-quality data to help identify potential sources. This information is needed to evaluate potential sources of chloride in areas where chloride may have adverse ecological effects or may degrade water supplies used for drinking water, agriculture, or industry. Knowledge of potential sources will help decisionmakers identify the best mitigation measures to reduce the total background chloride load, thereby reducing the potential for water-quality exceedances that occur because of superposition on rising background concentrations. Also, knowledge of potential sources may help decisionmakers identify the potential for the presence of contaminants that have toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic, or endocrine-disrupting effects at concentrations that are lower by orders of magnitude than the chloride concentrations in the source water. This report is a comprehensive synthesis of relevant information, but it is not the result of an exhaustive search for literature on each topic. The potential adverse effects of chloride on infrastructure and the environment are not discussed in this report because these issues have been extensively documented elsewhere.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 24.856534339310674° to 49.38237278700955° latitude; -124.69482421875° to -66.961669921875° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gregory E. Granato, Leslie A. DeSimone, Jeffrey R. Barbaro, Lillian C. Jeznach. 2015-09-04. Methods for evaluating potential sources of chloride in surface waters and groundwaters of the conterminous United States. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151080

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

ECCOE Landsat quarterly calibration and validation report—Quarter 2, 2026

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Calibration and Validation (Cal/Val) Center of Excellence (ECCOE) focuses on improving the accuracy, precision, calibration, and product quality of remote-sensing data, leveraging years of multiscale optical system geometric and radiometric calibration and characterization experience. The ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team continually monitors the geometric and radiometric performance of active Landsat missions and makes calibration adjustments, as needed, to maintain data quality at the highest level. This report provides observed geometric and radiometric analysis results for Landsats 8 and 9 for quarter 2 (April–June), 2026. All data used to compile the Cal/Val analysis results presented in this report are freely available from the U.S. Geological Survey EarthExplorer website: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov.

Open-File Report↗

ECCOE Landsat quarterly calibration and validation report—Quarter 1, 2026

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Calibration and Validation (Cal/Val) Center of Excellence (ECCOE) focuses on improving the accuracy, precision, calibration, and product quality of remote-sensing data, leveraging years of multiscale optical system geometric and radiometric calibration and characterization experience. The ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team continually monitors the geometric and radiometric performance of active Landsat missions and makes calibration adjustments, as needed, to maintain data quality at the highest level. This report provides observed geometric and radiometric analysis results for Landsats 8 and 9 for quarter 1 (January–March) of 2026. All data used to compile the Cal/Val analysis results presented in this report are freely available from the U.S. Geological Survey EarthExplorer website: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov . One specific activity that the ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team closely monitored was a Landsat 8 Thermal Infrared Sensor encoder alerts anomaly. On March 18, 2026, the Thermal Infrared Sensor instrument’s mechanism control electronics board reset, driving several parameters to default power-on values. Subsequent telemetry and analysis determined that no persistent hardware misconfiguration was present and no radiometric or geometric degradation was observed.

Open-File Report↗

Floods of June 20–July 6, 2024, in the Big Sioux River, Rock River, Little Sioux River, Ocheyedan River, and Floyd River Basins, northwestern Iowa

Major flooding occurred on June 20–July 6, 2024, in northwestern Iowa affecting the Big Sioux, Rock, Little Sioux, Ocheyedan, and Floyd River Basins. Heavy rain fell in northwestern Iowa, southwestern Minnesota, and southeastern South Dakota on June 20–22, 2024. Parts of northwestern Iowa recorded 2–6 inches of rainfall and localized amounts exceeding 12 inches. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 175,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Big Sioux River at Akron, Iowa (06485500), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at four locations along the Big Sioux River between U.S. Interstate 29 at Sioux City, Iowa, upstream to Iowa Highway 10 north of Hawarden, Iowa, a distance of 75.7 river miles. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 157,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Rock River near Rock Valley, Iowa (06483500), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability of less than 0.2 percent. High-water marks were measured at eight locations along the Rock River between County Road B30 east of Hudson, South Dakota, upstream to Iowa Highway 9 at Rock Rapids, Iowa, a distance of 39.3 river miles. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 63,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Little Sioux River at Correctionville, Iowa (06606600), was recorded on June 24, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at 11 locations along the Little Sioux River between Iowa Highway 31 west of Correctionville, Iowa, upstream to U.S. Highway 18 north of Spencer, Iowa, a distance of 134.8 river miles. A maximum streamflow of 24,500 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Ocheyedan River near Spencer, Iowa (06605000), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at three locations along the Ocheyedan River between County Road M38 west of Spencer, Iowa, upstream to U.S. Highway 18 west of Everly, Iowa, a distance of 12.8 river miles. A maximum streamflow of 41,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Floyd River at Alton, Iowa (06600100), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 1–1.99 percent. High-water marks were measured at six locations along the Floyd River between Iowa Highway 3 at Le Mars, Iowa, upstream to Iowa Highway 10 at Alton, Iowa, a distance of 27.5 river miles. The high-water marks were used to develop flood profiles for the Big Sioux, Rock, Little Sioux, Ocheyedan, and Floyd Rivers.

Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota↗