Western States Water Council 2005 Report

Home Browse Search

require Montana to establish a TMDL in this instance because there is no pollutant causing or contributing to the impairment.... Moreover, EPA does not consider this TMDL necessary to comply with the orders issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana in Friends of the Wi1� Swan, et al. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, et al CV 97- 35 -M -DWM (June 21, 2000, as amended Sept. 21, 2000, D.Mont.). This submission is not a `necessary TMDL,' since, as described above, the Act does not require States to establish TMDLs where there is no pollutant causing or contributing to a waterbody's impairment. Therefore, the Court's order does not require EPA or Montana to establish a TMDL for low flow for Big Creek. Again, we would like to acknowledge the good work on the Big Creek plan. Although we are not taking official action under section 303(d), we wish to concur with the elements of the plan and support the State in its implementation. 1147 In August 2001, EPA released a draft report estimating costs for implementing the TMDL program at between $900 million and $4.3 billion annually. EPA Administrator Christie Whitman stated in an August 3rd press release, "[The] draft report gives us important new information to use in determining the most effective course in restoring America's waters. We will continue to work with all parties to find a better way to finish the important job of cleaning up our great rivers, lakes and streams." The EPA cost study estimates the costs to states of additional data gathering to support the TMDL program to be $17M per year. Once states have collected good data, they will need to spend up to $69M per year over the next 15 years to develop plans to clean up some 20,000 impaired waters currently on state lists. State costs to develop a cleanup plan for each of these 20,000 waters are projected to average about $52,000 per plan. For the current fiscal year, EPA has $210M to help states, tribes and interstate agencies with grants for TMDL related work, including monitoring. The cleanup costs would fall primarily on dischargers. Of note, EPA does not have sufficient information to estimate cleanup costs for waters impaired by mining or air deposition.48 On October 18th, EPA published notice in the Federal Register that the revisions to EPA's TMDL program released on July 13, 2000 would not take effect until April 30th, 2003. The notice stated that EPA believes it is important to re- consider some of the choices made in the July 2000 rule in light of concerns expressed by many organizations, a number of studies, and recommendations in the National Research Council's June 19th report. Further, a delay in the effective date will allow EPA to solicit and carefully consider suggestions on how to structure the TMDL program to be effective and flexible and to ensure that it leads to workable solutions. Moreover, EPA believes that its decision voluntarily to reconsider the July 2000 rule may result in changes that will at least in part also resolve some of the issues raised in pending litigation in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals." The rule states, "Instead of expending resources in lengthy litigation, EPA believes it can speed up the process of putting in place a more workable program, while building a foundation of trust among stakeholders in the basic process for restoring impaired waters. Once this foundation is soundly 47 For more information visit www.epa.gov /region/8 /tmdls.html. 48 Western States Water, Issue 41424, August 31, 2001. 49 Western States Water, Issue #1431, October 19, 2001.