Anacostia Riverkeeper

Traditional laws such as the Clean Water Act sets precedent regarding the nature of pollutants and navigable water flows. The South Florida Water Management District decision to dump these phosphorus pollutants into the Okeechobee River without the proper permission, is an example of existing laws impacting state activities when it comes to water management.

An issue that was present in few specific cities in Maryland have now expanded throughout the entire state. The Chesapeake Bay, a large estuary that has an extremely complex ecosystem that is vital to important habitats and food webs in this area. The Chesapeake bay is arguably one of the most productive environments in the United States. Over the years, this bay has been in a decline of wellness. Pollution, contaminants, and many other factors are destroying the overall well being of these waters, and completely messing up the important ecosystem that has been built there. Although there is an extreme amount of Marylanders fighting for the restoration of the Chesapeake, there are also who are not.

The citizen suit provision of the Clean Water Act is an important tool to protect and improve rivers, creeks, streams, and wetlands especially as state agencies may not have the resources to conduct regular water quality monitoring on every water body. Citizen involvement in monitoring and reporting pollution problems is key to watershed protection; hereby helping the government enforce the laws.

The general population of the State of Georgia are reliant upon the waterways, streams, lakes, and subsurface waters for open and private water supply, and agrarian, modern, and recreational employments. The Georgia Water Quality Control Act (WQCA) (O.C.G.A. § 12-5-2) represents the effects on the water amount and quality inside the State of Georgia. The Environmental Protection Division (EPD) of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is charged to build up and keep up the quality and amount of Georgia's water assets (O.C.G.A § 12-5-21(b)). It is Georgia's arrangement that water assets be used judiciously for the most extreme advantage of the general population, keeping in mind the end goal to reestablish and keep up a sensible level of

In order to have a thriving and healthy society a clean water supply is a very simple but necessary resource. Dating back to the beginning of civilizations the need for clean water was an essential need. The Clean Water Act dates to Franklin D Roosevelt’s administration. In 1972 Congress amended and passed what is now known as the Clean Water Act to protect our precious resource of water. The clean water Act prevented the dumping of pollutants into navigable waters without a permit. Many municipalities and commercial entities had previously dumped sewage and unregulated waste in to our rivers and streams contaminating a great percentage of our drinking water. This wreck less contamination of our waterways not only affected humans but also affected our wildlife including fish and animal’s life that depended on these waters. Any municipality or company that could affect our waters would need to apply for a permit to do so. While the Clean Water Act was a landmark legislation that was supported by both Democrats and Republicans alike over the years has seen expansion of the EPA’s interpretation of the law and has created a controversy in Administrative Law that has many challenges up to the Unites States Supreme Court. (Television, n.d.)

New York, Connecticut, and EPA along with the federal Clean Water Act are ensuring enforcement to see a healthier Sound. The provisions of the federal Clean Water Act provide a vehicle for ensuring that nitrogen reduction targets are legally enforceable. A section of the Act (303(d)) requires the identification of a Total Maximum Daily Load for pollutants that will result in the accomplishment of water quality standards. Once a Total Maximum Daily Load has been established, the act calls for reductions to be allocated to sources so that the

In Jan. 2011, the EPA decided to veto the dumping of waste from the Spruce No. 1 Mine. But the agency’s efforts have so far been rebuffed by the courts as an overreach: Under the weird legal regime that governs mining, it’s the Army Corps of Engineers, not the EPA, which has the ultimate say-so over those permits. In 2012, the D.C. district court ruled that EPA lacked authority to veto the permit after the Corps had issued it. However, in fact EPA's decision is based on evidence from scientific research on serious environmental harm from mining. In May 2013, a coalition of Appalachian and environmental groups petitioned the EPA to set a numeric water quality standard under the Clean Water Act to protect streams from pollution caused by mountaintop removal mining . They claimed that “State politics and industry pressure have so far failed to end this pollution without such a standard and more and more streams and communities who rely on those waters are left vulnerable. We need EPA to act now.” The EPA’s authority over the Clean Water Act in respect to Spruce Mine No. 1 was finally affirmed by the Supreme Court in March 2014.

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) (P.L. 80-845, 62 Stat. 1155) of 1948 was the first major law enacted by Congress to address the problems of water pollution in the United States (n.d). Legislators created over 100 bills in an attempt to pass legislation over the previous half century, but were not successful. Industrial and urban growth caused by World War II in 1948, led to obvious, notorious pollution of the country's rivers, streams, and lakes, urging Congress to finally address the issue. Unfortunately, the act was not designed well enough to achieve the goals set out to address the issue. It did not ban pollution, only gave limited power to the federal government, and provided an extremely awkward enforcement mechanism. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act was not successful in preventing and reducing water pollution. Pollution continued to increase because of the federal government's inability to require any direct reduction in discharges. As a result, the quality of the nation's waters had no improvement. On the other hand, the act established a popular and political support for pollution control efforts. Congress rewrote the act in 1972 to provide more acceptable protection for the nation's waters. It also established the basic agenda for water pollution control, which was amended by Congress afterwards. Congress made changes to the act six times before rewriting it in 1972.

Fast forward 200 or so years to the 1800’s , the first permanent modern settlement known as Anacostia’s Historic District was created. Approximately 20 squares in Southeast DC, Anacostia’s Historic District otherwise known as Uniontown became the first suburb in DC. Uniontown is unique because it was designed to be a financially affordable neighborhood for middle class workers employed at the Navy Yard, across the river. Houses were built out of wood frame construction inspired by the Queen Anne style cottage homes. At the time in 1854, the sale, rental or lease of homes to African Americans in Anacostia was prohibited. Anacostia remained home to predominately white European Natives until the Great Migration of southern African Americans

The Clean Water Act (CWA) is the primary federal law in which the US governs water pollution. The Act states the objectives of eliminating releases of high amounts of toxic substances into water. The CWA made it unlawful to dump toxic materials into navigable, waters unless given a permit. The permit is given through the EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The purpose of The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System is to regulate point sources that flow into bodies of water. The Clean Water Act has been changed over the years because of

In 2013, the District promulgated Stormwater Management Regulations as required by a permit issued by EPA for the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). The District has elected to apply these regulations to both the separate and combined sewer system. Notwithstanding that fact, the District and DC Water have agreed in the draft MOU how the regulations will be applied to the GI Controls. The draft MOU provides for DC Water to pay all permit fees and the scope of the stormwater regulations that apply to the GI facilities is substantially reduced compared to a typical development project. This is because the purpose of the GI facilities is to control stormwater and they are not being constructed

In Seattle, there are three types of sewer systems: Combined Sewer, Partially Seperated Storn Sewer, and Seperated Strorm Sewer. In these three, the best way of sewer and stormwater managment is the last one to separate storm and sewer. This is because, if the dirty water and stormwater

The objective of the Clean Water Act and related Oregon Administrative Rules is to meet water quality standards or to take all those feasible steps towards achieving the uppermost quality water possible. This is a longstanding goal in many watersheds, chiefly where

The Orinoco River extends from Venezuela to Colombia. The Orinoco is one of the longest rivers in South America. The Andes Mountains, the Guiana Highlands, and the Amazon watershed. The surroundings of the Orinoco are rainforest, savanna, and plains. The climate of the Orinoco is a tropical rainforest. The seasons in the Orinoco are winter which is rainy and summer which is dry. These seasons are the result of migration of the intertropical convergence zone.

TMDLs measure the maximum amount of pollutant allow to enter the water without impacting the water quality.The drawback being that most states have lacked the resources to undertake this task, and the EPA has been circumspect to step in and to take responsibility, due to that fact that it lacks the necessary personnel to do the job nationwide. Since the late 1980s, there have over 40 lawsuits in 38 states against the EPA regarding TMDL.(Water Encyclopedia), Recent,Waterkeepers Chesapeake and 7 other Riverkeeper organizations, represented by Earthjustice organization,a non-profit environmental law firm, have filed lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the involvement of the delisting of 53 river segments in 17 Maryland counties and Baltimore City. This lawsuit challenges a regulatory action by the EPA that followed the approval of the Bay