Chesapeake Bay Program: the 2010 TMDL, the 2025 goals and results
- The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
- Government and regulators US Environmental Protection Agency (2026): The partnership met its watershed-wide interim target for sediment but did not meet its targets for nitrogen or phosphorus. US Environmental Protection Agency
- Government and regulators EPA Office of Inspector General (2023): The Program is not on track to have all controls and practices in place by 2025; EPA has not led partners to new goals or deadlines. EPA Office of Inspector General
- Communities and civil society Jon Mueller, former Chesapeake Bay Foundation vice president for litigation (2024): Pennsylvania is "dramatically off course" on its TMDL targets. Inside Climate News
- Government and regulators Anna Killius, Chesapeake Bay Commission (2024): Described the effort as "course correction" rather than failure (as reported by Inside Climate News). Inside Climate News
- Government and regulators US Environmental Protection Agency (2026): Progress is estimated with Phase 6 modelling tools from jurisdiction-reported practices; "Discrepancies between modeled and real-world data" create communication challenges and distrust. US Environmental Protection Agency
EPA established the Chesapeake Bay pollution limit (TMDL) on 29 December 2010, with controls to be in place by 2025. EPA's 2025 assessment (13 August 2026) reports that nitrogen loads fell 14.96 percent, meeting 57 percent of the interim target, phosphorus 21.4 percent (90 percent) and sediment 7 percent (100 percent); EPA's Inspector General found in 2023 that the programme was not on track.
EPA 2025 Assessment, 13 August 2026: nitrogen loads reduced 14.96 percent from 297.1 million to 252.7 million pounds. Phosphorus 90 percent of its interim target and sediment 100 percent. Load figures are modelled estimates reported by the partnership.
Status As of 13 August 2026: EPA reports the sediment interim target met and the nitrogen and phosphorus targets not met; the partnership has committed to set new targets and plans by 2030.
What happened
The Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) was established by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on 29 December 2010. EPA describes it as "a historic and comprehensive "pollution diet" to restore clean water in the Chesapeake Bay", with pollution control measures to be "in place by 2025" and practices in place by 2017 to meet "60 percent of the necessary pollution reductions". Seven jurisdictions (Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia) committed to implement it in three phases of Watershed Implementation Plans (2010, 2012 and 2019), with a midpoint assessment in 2017.
EPA's 2025 Assessment (dated 13 August 2026) wrote: "Across the watershed, between 2009 and 2025, nitrogen loads were reduced 14.96 percent from 297.1 million pounds to 252.7, meeting 57 percent of the interim nitrogen target. Phosphorus loads were reduced 21.4 percent, from 16.8 million pounds to 12.8 million pounds, meeting 90 percent of the phosphorus interim target. Sediment loads were reduced by 7 percent, from 18,830 million lbs to 17,555 million lbs, achieving 100 percent of the interim target." It wrote that the partnership "met its watershed-wide interim target for sediment but did not meet its watershed-wide interim targets for nitrogen or phosphorus". The assessment used the partnership's Phase 6 modelling tools on practices reported by jurisdictions. It listed challenges including growth in loads from population and development, agricultural intensification, the loss of Conowingo Dam trapping capacity, lag time between practices and water-quality improvement, and "Discrepancies between modeled and real-world data". The revised 2025 Watershed Agreement commits the partnership to new water quality targets and plans by 2030. In an earlier release (2 May 2024) the Chesapeake Bay Program wrote that model estimates showed nitrogen entering the Bay down 17% from 297.8 million pounds in 2009 to 247.6 million pounds in 2023.
EPA's Office of Inspector General (report 23-E-0023, 18 July 2023) found that "The Chesapeake Bay Program is not on track to have all controls and practices in place by 2025 to meet its Total Maximum Daily Load", that limits on EPA's Clean Water Act authority prevent federal actions from fully achieving the goals, and that EPA had not led partners to adopt new goals or deadlines. EPA did not concur with recommendations 1 (a new approach to nonpoint source pollution) and 3 (an assurance mechanism for jurisdictions), which the Inspector General recorded as unresolved, and concurred with recommendation 2 (new jurisdictional goals and a new deadline), with an estimated completion date of 15 January 2026. Inside Climate News reported in June 2024 that, except for West Virginia, every contributing state was failing to meet its TMDL obligations, and quoted an EPA spokesperson: "EPA has a dual role with respect to the Bay—as a partner as well as a regulator."
On money, GAO recorded in 2005 that the Bay Program received about US$3.7 billion in direct funding from 11 federal agencies, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and the District of Columbia in fiscal years 1995 to 2004, plus about US$1.9 billion in indirect funding, and found that the reporting process's lack of independence sometimes led to a more favorable picture of bay health than the data supported. The Office of Management and Budget's October 2024 spending crosscut gave federal agency totals (operating level) of US$549,131 thousand in FY 2022, US$523,808 thousand in FY 2023 and US$591,050 thousand in FY 2024, and wrote that the funding numbers are in many instances extrapolated or estimated and that there may be double-counting between state and federal tables. EPA's assessment recorded that Virginia allocated US$223 million in agricultural cost-share funding for FY 2026.
- 2005GAO-06-96 records about US$3.7 billion in direct funding for FY 1995-2004 and finds the Program lacks an integrated way to assess progress (28 October)
- 2010EPA establishes the Chesapeake Bay TMDL (29 December)
- 2017Midpoint assessment; 60 percent of necessary pollution reductions due by 2017
- 2023EPA Inspector General finds the Program not on track for 2025 (18 July); model estimates show nitrogen entering the Bay down 17% from 2009 to 2023 (Bay Program, 2 May 2024)
- 2024OMB spending crosscut reports FY 2024 federal operating level of US$591,050 thousand (October)
- 2025Revised Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement commits the partnership to new water quality targets by 2030; deadline for all practices to be in place
- 2026EPA's 2025 Assessment: nitrogen target 57 percent met, phosphorus 90 percent, sediment 100 percent (13 August)
What was said
“a historic and comprehensive "pollution diet" to restore clean water in the Chesapeake Bay”
“The Chesapeake Bay Program is not on track to have all controls and practices in place by 2025 to meet its Total Maximum Daily Load”
“the public cannot easily determine whether the health of the bay is improving or not”
“EPA has a dual role with respect to the Bay—as a partner as well as a regulator”
“dramatically off course”
“the basic implementation and enforcement of the Clean Water Act”
Where accounts differ
Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.
The partnership met its watershed-wide interim target for sediment but did not meet its targets for nitrogen or phosphorus.
US Environmental Protection AgencyThe Program is not on track to have all controls and practices in place by 2025; EPA has not led partners to new goals or deadlines.
EPA Office of Inspector GeneralPennsylvania is "dramatically off course" on its TMDL targets.
Inside Climate NewsDescribed the effort as "course correction" rather than failure (as reported by Inside Climate News).
Inside Climate NewsProgress is estimated with Phase 6 modelling tools from jurisdiction-reported practices; "Discrepancies between modeled and real-world data" create communication challenges and distrust.
US Environmental Protection AgencyHow it looked
Shown
- The TMDL described as "a historic and comprehensive "pollution diet" to restore clean water in the Chesapeake Bay", with controls in place by 2025.US Environmental Protection Agency · US Environmental Protection Agency
- The partnership described as having "made considerable progress" with "historic levels of funding dedicated to restoration", while interim nitrogen and phosphorus targets were not met.US Environmental Protection Agency, 2025 Assessment · US Environmental Protection Agency
- Model estimates presented as showing nitrogen entering the Bay down 17% from 2009 to 2023.Chesapeake Bay Program · Chesapeake Bay Program
Recorded
- 2009 to 2025: nitrogen loads down 14.96 percent (297.1 to 252.7 million pounds), 57 percent of the interim target; phosphorus down 21.4 percent (16.8 to 12.8 million pounds), 90 percent; sediment down 7 percent (18,830 to 17,555 million pounds), 100 percent (EPA, modelled).
- EPA Inspector General (2023): the Program is not on track to have all controls and practices in place by 2025; EPA did not concur with recommendations 1 and 3.
- GAO (2005): about US$3.7 billion in direct and about US$1.9 billion in indirect funding in FY 1995-2004; six recommendations to EPA, all listed as closed and implemented.
- UMCES report card page: Chesapeake Bay health C+ and watershed health C+ in 2025.
- No source reviewed gives monitored (rather than modelled) water-quality results for the whole Bay against the 2025 goals.
In nature's name
Promised
- “a historic and comprehensive "pollution diet" to restore clean water in the Chesapeake Bay” — US Environmental Protection Agency, on the TMDL (29 December 2010) US Environmental Protection Agency
Money moved in nature's name
| What | Kind | Amount | Period |
|---|---|---|---|
| Federal agencies' operating level for Chesapeake Bay restoration, FY 2024 Federal agencies on the Federal Leadership Committee for the Chesapeake Bay Office of Management and Budget (via Biden White House archive) | Budget | $591m estimate | FY 2024 |
| Federal agencies' operating level for Chesapeake Bay restoration, FY 2023 Federal agencies on the Federal Leadership Committee for the Chesapeake Bay Office of Management and Budget (via Biden White House archive) | Budget | $524m estimate | FY 2023 |
| Federal agencies' operating level for Chesapeake Bay restoration, FY 2022 Federal agencies on the Federal Leadership Committee for the Chesapeake Bay Office of Management and Budget (via Biden White House archive) | Budget | $549m estimate | FY 2022 |
| Direct funding for the Bay Program from 11 federal agencies, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and the District of Columbia Federal agencies and state-level governments US Government Accountability Office | Budget | $3.7bn estimate | FY 1995-2004 |
| Virginia Agricultural Cost Share programme funding in the Chesapeake Bay watershed Commonwealth of Virginia US Environmental Protection Agency | Budget | $223m | FY 2026 |
| Total funding levels Congress provided for federal Chesapeake Bay restoration activities US Congress (federal agencies on the Federal Leadership Committee for the Chesapeake Bay) Congressional Research Service | Budget | $5.7bn estimate | FY 2014-2024 |
What was measured
EPA's own assessment reports modelled load reductions: nitrogen 57 percent and phosphorus 90 percent of the interim targets and sediment 100 percent, against a goal of all controls in place by 2025. EPA's Inspector General, an independent audit office within EPA, found in 2023 that the programme was not on track for 2025. The load figures are model estimates reported by the partnership and are not an independent measurement of the Bay's condition; the UMCES report card page gives C+ for 2025 without indicator detail.
Operation Ongoing · The 2025 Watershed Agreement commits the partnership to new water quality targets and plans by 2030. US Environmental Protection Agency
Findings on record
- Official audit EPA Office of Inspector General (2023-07-18) · Report 23-E-0023: “not on track to have all controls and practices in place by 2025” EPA Office of Inspector General
- Official audit US Government Accountability Office (2005-10-28) · GAO-06-96: “the public cannot easily determine whether the health of the bay is improving or not” US Government Accountability Office
- Own admission US Environmental Protection Agency, 2025 Assessment (2026-08-13) · 2025 Assessment of the Chesapeake Bay Program partnership's progress toward the 2025 Water Quality Goal: “did not meet its watershed-wide interim targets for nitrogen or phosphorus” US Environmental Protection Agency
Who gained
Reached nature or the ground
Gained elsewhere
Responses on record
- US Environmental Protection Agency (2023; 2024; 13 August 2026): In its 2025 Assessment, wrote that the partnership met its sediment target and did not meet its nitrogen or phosphorus targets. To the Inspector General, EPA did not concur with recommendations 1 and 3 and concurred with recommendation 2 (completion estimated 15 January 2026). A spokesperson said in 2024: "EPA has a dual role with respect to the Bay—as a partner as well as a regulator." · US Environmental Protection Agency
- Chesapeake Bay Program (2 May 2024): Reported in 2024 that model estimates showed nitrogen entering the Bay down 17% from 2009 to 2023. · Chesapeake Bay Program
In court and with insurers
Lawsuits and rulings
Insurers
What nature saw
Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.
What we don't know
Nature
- Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.
- Disputed Whether the 2025 goals are on course
- Disputed Modelled versus real-world data
Record
- Insufficient Insufficient: monitored water-quality results. EPA's assessment uses modelled load reductions and lists "Discrepancies between modeled and real-world data" among the challenges.
- Unclear None on record: a single total of federal and state spending since 2010. The OMB crosscut gives federal totals by year and states that state data may double-count federal funding.
- Disputed Disputed: whether the goals are on course. EPA's 2025 Assessment says the partnership met its sediment target and did not meet its nitrogen or phosphorus targets; the Inspector General found the programme not on track; a Chesapeake Bay Commission representative described "course correction" rather than failure.
- Unclear Unclear: the UMCES grade for the latest report card. The report card page shows C+ for 2025; the page gives no indicator scores or earlier grades.
- Not measured Not measured: the effect of the 2025 Watershed Agreement's new targets, which are to be set by 2030.
Did the harm stop?
The sources reviewed do not report that nutrient and sediment loading has stopped. EPA's 2025 Assessment lists rising loads from population growth, development and agricultural intensification among the challenges, and its table footnote states that a value of 0% indicates that growth outpaces current implementation efforts, leading to an overall increase in loads.
Who paid?
Federal and state funds. GAO recorded about US$3.7 billion in direct funding in FY 1995-2004 from 11 federal agencies and four state-level governments; OMB recorded federal agency operating levels of US$549,131 thousand (FY 2022), US$523,808 thousand (FY 2023) and US$591,050 thousand (FY 2024); Virginia allocated US$223 million in agricultural cost-share funding for FY 2026.
Sources
Government and regulators
- Chesapeake Bay TMDLUS Environmental Protection Agency · 2010-12-29
- 2025 Assessment of the Chesapeake Bay Program partnership's progress toward the 2025 Water Quality GoalUS Environmental Protection Agency · 2026-08-13
- The EPA Should Update Its Strategy, Goals, Deadlines, and Accountability Framework to Better Lead Chesapeake Bay Restoration Efforts (Report 23-E-0023)EPA Office of Inspector General · 2023-07-18
- Chesapeake Bay Program: Improved Strategies Are Needed to Better Assess, Report, and Manage Restoration Progress (GAO-06-96)US Government Accountability Office · 2005-10-28
- Chesapeake Bay Restoration Spending Crosscut, Report to CongressOffice of Management and Budget (via Biden White House archive) · 2024-10
- Chesapeake Bay Program model estimates decline in nutrients, sediment (press release)Chesapeake Bay Program · 2024-05-02
- Chesapeake Bay Restoration: Overview and Issues for Congress (CRS In Focus IF13258), via EveryCRSReportCongressional Research Service · 2026-06-26
Press and investigations
- The Chesapeake Bay Program Isn't Likely to Hit Its 2025 Cleanup Goals. What Happens Next? (Aman Azhar)Inside Climate News · 2024-06-26
Researchers
- Chesapeake Bay report card pageUniversity of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (Integration and Application Network) · 2026
Connected cases
- US compensatory mitigation and conservation banking under the "no net loss" policy United States · 1988–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Co-author of the 1990 agreement, 1995 guidance and 2008 rule
- US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Public authority) — here: Reviewed the Program's funding and reporting in 2005; there: Audited Corps oversight of compensatory mitigation in 2005 and 2026
- 1,4-dioxane in Tide: Prop 65 settlement and New York limit United States · 2011–2024
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; revised risk determination
- 3M PFOS: internal evidence, EPA penalty and Minnesota settlement United States · 1979–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; TSCA charge closed 2006
- ADM Decatur carbon storage site leaks about 8,000 tons, EPA finds United States · 2023–2024
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: regulator that found a violation
- AES coal ash sold as road fill in Guayama, Puerto Rico; arsenic above standard United States · 2021
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Federal regulator promising action
- After Sackett ruling, NRDC says at least 60% of individual wetlands are unprotected United States · 2023
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Defendant in Sackett; named in reported 2025 and 2026 proposals to narrow the test (unconfirmed)
- Asbestos 524(g) bankruptcy trusts and J&J talc two-step United States · 1988
- US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Public authority) — here: Reviewed the Program's funding and reporting in 2005; there: Source of the 2011 asbestos trust data
- BP Deepwater Horizon: the spill, the court cases and the recovery claims United States · 2010–2031
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Suspended BP from new federal contracts, 2012–2014
- California v. ExxonMobil: plastics recycling claims and the Baytown plant United States · 2021–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Rejected the mass balance method for its Safer Choice label, per ProPublica
- Chemours spin-off liabilities United States · 2015–2025
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator in the December 2005 PFOA case
- Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (Florida): cost estimates, spending and National Academies reviews United States · 2000–2026
- US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Public authority) — here: Reviewed the Program's funding and reporting in 2005; there: Reviewed the plan's cost and reporting in 2000
- Court reverses $60 million punitive award in dicamba case United States · 2015–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Approved over-the-top dicamba use for 2026 and 2027
- Diamond Shamrock Lister Avenue dioxin, Passaic River United States · 1984–1993
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Selected the 2016 lower Passaic remedy
- Dicamba drift (Bader Farms) and EPA re-registration United States · 2015–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; re-registered dicamba in February 2026
- DuPont PFOA (C8) at Washington Works, Parkersburg, and the Tennant farm United States · 1981–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; 2005 penalty
- EPA repeals 2009 greenhouse gas endangerment finding on legal grounds United States · 2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Issued the repeal
- Exxon Valdez: the spill, insurance and court cases United States · 1989–2015
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Federal regulator in the 1991 settlement
- Fieldwood bankruptcy and US offshore decommissioning United States · 2024
- US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Public authority) — here: Reviewed the Program's funding and reporting in 2005; there: Auditor; estimated liabilities
- Former EPA chief Lisa Jackson named interim chair of Conservation International United States · 2012–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Withdrew the Range Resources emergency order in 2012
- GE ran a 'Let Nature Clean Up the Hudson' campaign against EPA dredging United States · 2009–2015
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator that ordered and certified the dredging
- GenX chemical found in Cape Fear River, a DuPont and Chemours replacement for PFOA United States · 2009
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Found in 2021 that GenX was more toxic than previously thought
- Greens report: parts of German glyphosate assessment copied Monsanto file Germany · 2015–2025
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: US regulator; former staff moved to Monsanto; Rowland remark reported
- Gulf of Mexico dead zone (Mississippi nutrient runoff) United States · 1985–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Clean Water Act regulator
- Holcim Geocycle and brand-cement plastic co-processing Global · 2021–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; found no meaningful climate benefit from burning plastic instead of coal in kilns (as reported)
- Make Sunsets stratospheric balloon launches (Mexico) Mexico · 2022–2025
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator that requested information
- Monsanto/Bayer PCB and Roundup insurance suit v AIG United States · 1967–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; reported to have told Bayer it would not accept a cancer warning
- Mosaic settles US hazardous-waste case over phosphogypsum handling United States · 2015
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator that inspected the sites and signed the settlement
- Nonylphenol ethoxylates: Swiss ban and EU restriction Switzerland · 1984–2014
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Published the nonylphenol ethoxylate action plan
- Paraquat bans, UK production for export and Chinese exports United Kingdom · 1989–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; interim decision of 2021 and January 2025 announcement
- Paraquat litigation (Syngenta/Chevron) and the Paraquat Papers United States · 1958–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; 2021 interim decision and 2025 withdrawal
- Peabody, Patriot Coal and coal self-bonding United States · 2007–2020
- US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Public authority) — here: Reviewed the Program's funding and reporting in 2005; there: US government auditor that recommended ending self-bonding
- PFAS water utility settlements by 3M, DuPont, Chemours and Corteva United States · 2023–2036
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; drinking-water limits for PFOA and PFOS
- PG&E wildfire settlement, tax deduction and Fire Victim Trust United States · 2018–2025
- US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Public authority) — here: Reviewed the Program's funding and reporting in 2005; there: Reviewer of tax treatment of settlements (2005)
- Portland Harbor Superfund cleanup plan (Willamette River, Oregon) United States · 2016–2017
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator; issued the draft plan and the final Superfund decision
- Roundup litigation, settlements and legal shield (Bayer/Monsanto) United States · 2009–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Approved the Roundup label; said it would not accept a cancer warning
- Starbase launch site, Boca Chica, Texas: environmental review, penalties and Starship debris United States · 2022–2025
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Federal environmental regulator; found Clean Water Act violations
- Stockholm Convention agrees chlorpyrifos phase-out with 22 uses exempted United States · 2021–2025
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: regulator
- Trump's EPA keeps Biden-era veto on Alaska's Pebble mine United States · 2023–2025
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Issued and reaffirmed the veto
- US bans DDT in 1972; bald eagle breeding pairs rebound United States · 1972–2019
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: issued the 1972 DDT ban
- US coal ash ponds, groundwater contamination and EPA delay United States · 2015–2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Regulator
- US Conservation Reserve Program: annual rental payments to take cropland out of production United States · 1985–2026
- US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Public authority) — here: Reviewed the Program's funding and reporting in 2005; there: Audited FSA's selection of CRP land in 2024
- US Defense Department PFAS costs top USD 9.3 billion at 718 installations United States · 2022–2025
- US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Public authority) — here: Reviewed the Program's funding and reporting in 2005; there: Published the PFAS cost report
- US power-plant sulfur emissions fell over 95%, EPA says United States · 1990–2022
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: published the programme results
- US Superfund tax and funding shortfall United States · 1980–2025
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Administers Superfund; reports responsible-party commitments
- US Supreme Court blocks state cancer-warning suits against pesticide makers United States · 2026
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Approved the labels; announced the paraquat review
- US tax deductibility of environmental settlements (IRC 162(f)) United States · 2017
- US Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Public authority) — here: Reviewed the Program's funding and reporting in 2005; there: Auditor of the settlement sample (GAO-05-747)
- Washakie Renewable Energy, the Kingston family and Dermen: biodiesel tax credits and RINs (United States, 2010–2018) United States · 2010–2023
- US Environmental Protection Agency (Public authority) — here: Established the TMDL, oversees the accountability framework and assessed progress in 2026; there: Recorded RINs sold for about $65m; FY2023 enforcement summary