This dissertation proposes that specific characteristics of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) total maximum daily load (TMDL) program make non-judicial, third-party intervention in TMDL disputes preferable to other methods of resolving such disputes. A matched-pairs methodology is employed to investigate this hypothesis. The hypotheses suggest that intervention in TMDL cases promote higher levels of satisfaction with the TMDL development process, that stakeholder satisfaction levels are related to the complexity of TMDL cases, and that specific intervention strategies and tactics are more successful than others in resolving TMDL disputes. These hypotheses were examined by conducting more than 80 personal interviews with stakeholders, regulatory officials, and interveners. The dissertation provides recommendations for conflict resolution practitioners considering intervention in TMDL disputes.