Questions? Call 888-624-8373

PAPERBACK
list:$31.25
Web:$28.12
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

Free PDF Access

topleft topright

Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management (2001)
Commission on Geosciences, Environment and Resources (CGER)

Page
5
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Page 5

uses at the state level (such as primary and secondary contact recreation). The appropriate designated use may not be the use that would be realized in the water's predisturbance condition. Sufficient science and examples exist for all states to inject this level of detail into their water quality standards. To ensure that designated uses are appropriate, use attainability analysis should be considered for all waterbodies before a TMDL is developed.

EPA should approve the use of both a preliminary list and an action list instead of one 303d list. Many waters now on state 303d lists were placed there without the benefit of adequate water quality standards, data, or waterbody assessment. These potentially erroneous listings contribute to a very large backlog of TMDL segments and foster the perception of a problem that is larger than it may actually be. States should be allowed to move those waters for which there is a lack of adequate water quality standards or data and analysis from the 303d list back to a preliminary list, as shown in Figure ES-1. This would provide the assurance that listed waters are indeed legitimate and merit the resources required to complete a TMDL. If no legal mechanism exists to bring this about, one should be created by Congress. The data requirements and other criteria that should be used to differentiate the preliminary list from the action list are discussed in the report. No waterbody should remain on the preliminary list for more than one rotating basin cycle.

TMDL plans should employ adaptive implementation. As shown in Figure ES-2, adaptive implementation is a cyclical process in which TMDL plans are periodically assessed for their achievement of water quality standards including designated uses. If the implementation of the TMDL plan is not achieving attainment of the designated use, scientific data and information should be used to revise the plan. Adaptive implementation is needed to ensure that the TMDL program is not halted because of a lack of data and information, but rather progresses while better data are collected and analyzed with the intent of improving upon initial TMDL plans. Congress and EPA need to address the policy barriers that inhibit adoption of an adaptive implementation approach to the TMDL program, including the issues of future growth, the equitable distribution of cost and responsibility among sources of pollution, and EPA oversight.

Page
5