To : Iowa Topics
From: Debbie Neustadt
TMDL's, EPA, and Riders

The EPA had published a set of new rules at the beginning of the year
and many environmental organizations thought they did not go far enough.
Some members of Congress thought they went too far and voted to cut off
funding for implementing the new rules in an appropriations rider. ( Of
course some congressman felt trapped into voting for the rider) Clinton
asked EPA to finalize the new rules before he signed the appropriations
rider and they did today.

This is a copy of a memo sent to pollution activist on the clubs clean
water listserve for leaders. The Iowa Chapter is currently suing the EPA
over TMDL's in Iowa.

______________________________________________________________________________

Almost two months ago, the Club had called for EPA to withdraw a
fatally-flawed rule establishing new procedures  for EPA's Total Maximum
Daily Load (TMDL) program.  Much has happened since
then, and the Club has taken a new position on TMDL rules.

In response to comments by the Club and other organizations, EPA made
many
improvments in the proposed rule.  A few important improvements include
the
following:

   The rule sets a deadline for developing TMDLs for listed waterbodies
(as
expeditiously as practicable, with a deadline of ten years and a
possible five
year extension).  Under current rules, there is no timeframe for states
to
establish TMDLs for listed waterbodies.

   EPA must step in when a state fails to establish TMDLs.  Under
current rules,
this obligation exists only when the EPA disapproves a state's TMDLs,
not when a
state fails to do them at all.

   The new rule requires plans that demonstrate how states (or EPA, if a
state
fails) will implement pollution controls to assure that a water body
will meet
water quality standards.  The current rule does not require these
implementation
plans, nor does it require EPA action if a state fails to act.

   There are deadlines for putting pollution controls in place for both
point
and non-point pollution sources.  If the states don't act, EPA must.  In
the
current rule, there are no deadlines for measures to control pollution,
and EPA
has no obligation to take action if states fail.

   The new rules establish an expectation that water quality standards
will be
met within ten years.  There is no timeframe in current rules for
achieving
water quality standards.

   The rule requires monitoring plans to assess cleanup progress and
establishes
a process for revising the TMDL is water quality standards are not met.
There
is no requirement for monitoring and TMDL revision under the current
rules.

While EPA was preparing to finalize this rule, Congress slipped a rider
preventing EPA from finalizing and implementing the new rules into the
emergency
supplemental portion of the Military Construction Appropriations bill
conference
report.  Members could not take an up-or-down vote on the bill, and it
passed
both houses.

The Administration could not realistically veto the bill, but it
instructed the
EPA to finalize the rule before the President signed the bill.  That
occurred
today.  This may set up a major fight about clean water and
anti-environmental
riders.  A press release from the Sierra Club, NRDC and US PIRG has
already bee distributed to this list

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For SC email list T-and-C, send: GET TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS.CURRENT
to [log in to unmask]