| |
TMDL
Allocation |
Implementation Plan |
TMDL Project
(Click on the project for more information.)
Parameter—Segments |
Impairments Addressed in
Project |
Water Bodies Addressed in
Project |
TCEQ Date of TMDL Adoption |
TMDLs Adopted |
EPA Date
of Action
on TMDLs |
TMDLs Approved |
TCEQ Date
of Approval
for
I-Plans |
TMDLs Addressed by I-Plan |
Aquilla Reservoir
Atrazine—1254 |
1 |
1 |
Original 3/23/01; Revised
6/14/02 |
1 |
10/30/02
|
1 |
01/18/02 |
1 |
Arroyo Colorado
Legacy Pollutants: DDE, Chlordane,
Toxaphene—2202
PCBs—2202A |
4 |
2* |
1/17/01 |
4 |
6/14/01 |
4 |
9/14/01 |
4 |
Arroyo Colorado
Legacy Pollutants: DDT, DDD, dieldrin, endrin, lindane,
hexachlorobenzene, heptachlor, heptachlor
epoxide—2202 |
8 |
1* |
07/25/03 |
8 |
05/13/04 |
8 |
|
|
Clear Creek Above and Below Tidal
Chlordane—1101, 1102 |
2 |
2* |
1/17/01 |
2 |
6/14/01 |
2 |
9/14/01 |
2 |
Clear Creek Above and Below Tidal
Trichloroethane, Dichloroethane—1101, 1102 |
4 |
2* |
Original 2/9/01; Revised
6/14/02 |
4 |
05/09/03 |
4 |
10/12/01 |
4 |
Clear Creek Above Tidal
TDS, chloride—1102 |
2 |
1* |
08/10/05;
Revised 04/12/06 |
2 |
06/26/06 |
2 |
08/23/06 |
2 |
Colorado River Below E.V. Spence Reservoir
Chloride, Total Dissolved Solids—1426 |
2 |
1 |
02/07/07 |
2 |
04/09/07 |
2 |
10/10/07 |
2 |
Dallas Legacy
Chlordane—805, 841
DDD, DDE, DDT, PCBs, Chlordane, Dieldrin, Heptachlor
epoxide - 841A |
9 |
3 |
12/20/00 |
9 |
6/27/01
|
9 |
8/10/01 |
9 |
E.V. Spence
Sulfate, TDS—1411 |
2 |
1 |
Original 11/17/00;
Revised 6/14/02 |
2 |
05/09/03 |
2 |
8/10/01 |
2 |
Fort Worth Legacy
Chlordane—806, 829
DDE, PCBs, Chlordane, Dieldrin—806A
DDE, PCBs, Chlordane, Dieldrin—829A
PCBs—806B |
11 |
5 |
11/17/00 |
11 |
5/24/01 |
11 |
7/13/01 |
11 |
Gilleland Creek
Bacteria—1428C |
1 |
1 |
08/08/07 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
Guadalupe River Above Canyon Lake
Bacteria—1806 |
1 |
1 |
07/25/07 |
1 |
09/25/07 |
1 |
|
|
Houston Ship Channel Nickel
Nickel—1001, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1013, 1014, 1016, 1017,
2426, 2427, 2428, 2429, 2430, 2436 |
14 |
14 |
Original 8/11/00; Revised
6/14/02 |
14 |
05/09/03 |
14 |
7/13/01 |
14 |
Lake Austin DO
DO—1403 |
1 |
1 |
11/17/00 |
1 |
12/05/01
EPA declined
to take action
on this TMDL |
0 |
7/13/01 |
1 |
Lake O’ the Pines
DO—0403 |
1 |
1 |
04/12/06 |
1 |
06/07/06 |
1 |
7/9/08 |
1 |
Lake Worth
PCBs—0807 |
1 |
1 |
08/10/05 |
1 |
10/13/05 |
1 |
08/23/06 |
1 |
Lower Sabinal River
nitrate-nitrogen—2110 |
1 |
1 |
08/10/05 |
1 |
10/13/05 |
1 |
08/23/06 |
1 |
North Bosque River
Nutrients (narrative)—1226, 1255 |
2 |
2 |
2/9/01 |
2 |
12/13/01
|
2 |
12/13/02 |
2 |
Nueces Bay
Zinc in Oyster Tissue—2482 |
1 |
1 |
11/01/06 |
1 |
12/15/06 |
1 |
10/24/07 |
1 |
Orange County Watersheds
Bacteria, Dissolved Oxygen, pH—0508, 0508A, 0508B,
0508C, 0511, 0511A, 0511B, 0511C, and 0511E |
17 |
9 |
06/13/07 |
17 |
08/28/07 |
17 |
|
|
Oso Bay
Bacteria—2485 |
1 |
1 |
08/22/07 |
1 |
06/08/08 |
1 |
|
|
Petronila Creek Above Tidal
Chloride, Sulfate, Total Dissolved Solids—2204 |
3 |
1 |
01/10/07 |
3 |
03/14/07 |
3 |
10/10/07 |
3 |
Salado Creek
DO—1910 |
1 |
1* |
10/12/01 |
1 |
08/08/03 |
1 |
Creek is
supporting
the aquatic
life use,
so an IP
is not needed. |
N/A |
Upper San Antonio River
Bacteria—1910, 1910A, 1911 |
3 |
3* |
07/25/07 |
3 |
9/25/07 |
3 |
|
|
Upper Oyster Creek
Bacteria—1245 |
1 |
1 |
08/08/07 |
1 |
09/28/07 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
# of Impairments Addressed in Project |
# of Water Bodies Addressed in Project |
|
# TMDLs Adopted |
|
# TMDLs Approved |
|
# TMDLs Addressed by I-Plan |
|
Totals |
94
Impairments |
53 water
bodies |
|
94 TMDLs for 53
water bodies |
|
92 TMDLs for 51
water bodies |
|
61 TMDLs for 35
water bodies
(17 Plans) |
*More than one project addresses the water body or bodies.
The EPA requires one TMDL for each impairment listed in each
water body. An impairment is the combination of the use that is
affected (such as support of aquatic life) with the pollutant or
condition of concern (such as mercury or low dissolved oxygen). For
example, if Jones Creek was listed as not meeting the aquatic life
use because of low dissolved oxygen concentrations, and not meeting
the fish consumption use because of mercury in fish tissue, two
TMDLs would be required for Jones Creek.
To be most efficient with resources of time and money, the TMDL
Program may conduct one project that addresses the same pollutant
in multiple water bodies, or may conduct a project that addresses
multiple similar pollutants (such as three different pesticides) in
one water body. So a single project may produce many TMDLs.
Federal law requires that the EPA take formal action to approve
or disapprove any TMDLs adopted by the states. So, on any
particular date, the number of TMDLs adopted by the Commission may
differ from the number approved by the EPA. Similarly, there is a
lag time between the completion of a TMDL and the Commission’s
approval of the plan to implement the TMDLs. That means that the
number of TMDLs and I-Plans will not usually match, since TMDLs and
I-Plans are being completed all the time.
