Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
In an effort to clean up our regions waters, the Center – representing
its clients ALS, ACA, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, PENN PIRG, NJPIRG
Citizens’ Lobby and Sierra Club (Delaware and Maryland) – commenced
legal actions in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland and Virginia.
These actions sought to require the EPA to: (1) identify WQLSs; (2) (3)
establish TMDLs for each WQLS; and (3) consult and confer with appropriate
federal wildlife agencies before identifying WQLSs or establishing TMDLs
to determine the effect on federally listed threatened or endangered
species or their habitat. These five states had failed to meet these
requirements and EPA had failed to step in to enforce it.
Each of thes five cases resulted in a settlement requiring real steps forward by the state agencies. However, the work is still not done. The region’s environmental organizations have been faced with a diverse array of planning initiatives and a series of federal and state regulations to implement settlement agreements that need close scrutiny. The process must be monitored to ensure that the many tasks and timelines presented in the settlement agreements and other state commitments are being met. TMDLS that are being issued under these timelines are reviewed and commented upon by Center attorneys.
The five cases are:
American Littoral Society v. EPA, Civil Action No. 96-0489 (E.D.Pa.
1996)
American Littoral Society v. EPA, Civil Action No. 96-591 (D.Del. 1996).
American Canoe Association v. EPA, Civil Action No. 98-989 (E.D.Pa. 1998)
Sierra Club v. EPA, Civil Action No. 97-3838 (D.Md. 1997)
American Littoral Society v. EPA, Civil Action No. 96-339 (D.N.J. 1996)
Achieving
pollution cutbacks to meet the TMDL target for a watershed can easily
require the cooperation of many entities not formerly engaged
in efforts to achieve WQSs. For an over nutrified stream, for example,
discussions and negotiations to achieve cutbacks in phosphorus loadings
could include road departments, municipal stormwater regulators, livestock
owners, farmers and riparian landowners in addition to the already permitted
direct dischargers.
Using TMDLs to place limits on pollution in water bodies is a powerful
tool in our water quality protection efforts. It is important that the
strongest TMDL possible are developed and that the process is not subverted
by financial, political or other interests that are not water quality
driven. Because we are now at the beginning of the process, it is critical
that the assessment work and the TMDLs created are scientifically and
legally defensible, that they meet their water quality objectives and
that they actually are implemented. To these ends, the Center serves
a critical role by analyzing TMDLs and providing technical comments to
the regulatory agencies. In the mid-Atlantic area, the Center is often
the only group to submit comments for these important plans. Examples
of the Center’s TMDL comments are linked below:
Maryland Fecal Coliform TMDL MAELC Comments —
September 8, 2004
Breton Bay Nutrient TMDL
Christina River Bacteria Sediment TMDL
Comments for PCB Schuylkill River
Comments LDWR17
Lake Wallenpaupack Mercury TMDL
|