Transportation and Infrastructure Committee: Press Release :: Reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Program
Home | About the Committee | Subcommittees |News| Hearings | Reports | Gallery | Minority Web Site
Press Release
View Web Cast
Sept. 23, 2009 at 2:00 p.m. Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management: Risk-based Security in Federal Buildings: Targeting Funds to Real Risks and Eliminating Unnecessary Security Obstacles Next Live Web Cast Sept. 24, 2009 at 11:00 a.m. Full Committee MARKUP Go to the Hearings Page for additional video
Reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Program
Chairman Oberstar and Subcommittee Chair Johnson opening statements from todayâ ™s Water Resources and Environment subcommittee hearing September 22, 2009
By Mary Kerr 202-225-6260 Statement of The Honorable James L. Oberstar September 22, 2009 Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for holding today’s hearing on efforts to restore one of America’s Great Waters – the Chesapeake Bay. The Bay’s importance to this region and the nation is undeniable and unparalleled. The Chesapeake Bay is North America’s largest estuary and home to more than 3,700 species of plants and animals. Furthermore, the Bay watershed, over 64,000 square miles in size, is home to more than 17 million residents. It holds such great significance, in fact, that large scale efforts aimed at improving the water quality of the Chesapeake have been in existence for over twenty-five years. It was then, in 1983, that Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, along with the District of Columbia, the Chesapeake Bay Commission and the EPA, signed the Chesapeake Bay Agreement, aimed at protecting and restoring the Bay. Since the signing of the Agreement, representatives from federal, state and local governments, and interested stakeholders have devoted an enormous amount of resources towards Bay restoration efforts. As a direct result of these efforts, the Bay has become the most researched and most studied body of water in the world. These efforts and investments have yielded some results, but substantial improvements in the water quality of the Chesapeake have not yet been realized. As we gather more and more knowledge about the effects of pollution on the bay, it continues to suffer from atmospheric deposition and nutrient runoff. As we stand by, the Bay continues to be impaired. Currently, the Bay’s native oyster population is less than one percent of its historic levels. The Chesapeake’s oyster population has been decimated by overfishing, loss of habitat, and poor water quality caused by nutrient runoff. This species was once resilient and abundant, and an entire economy relied on this fishery. It is commonly understood that at the beginning of the century, oysters filtered the entirety of the Bay in a matter of days. Now, native oysters in the Bay are a fragile aquatic species taking more than a year to filter the same body of water. Given the great amount of resources and the length of time that the signatories to the Bay Agreement have been trying to restore the Bay, we would hope to see much stronger signs of success than we currently do. Clearly, a new approach is needed. Over a year ago this, the Committee held a hearing on the protection and restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. The hearing restated what is largely known about the Bay; that the leading stressors are atmospheric deposition from our cars, power plants and industrial livestock operations, stormwater from growing communities, discharges from wastewater treatment facilities, and nutrient runoff from agricultural lands. What was news worthy at the time was the admission by the previous Administration that restoration efforts were off target, and we were going to miss the 2010 cleanup date by a mile. However, that admission was the last we heard from the Administration on the Bay. Fortunately for us all, those days are past. In recent months, the Obama Administration has refocused attention towards restoration efforts on the
Recovery Act Transparency & Accountability Information
P.L. 111-5, THE AMERICAN RECOVERY & REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009
q
State of the Economy
q
q
q q
q
q
q
T&I Agenda Comparison Chart 108th & 109th to 110th & 111th Congresses Hearings Comparison Since 2001 Bills Comparison Since 2001 Legislative Summary of the 110th
(September, 2009) Funding Tables for P.L. 111-5 High-Speed Rail Corridors More Information
q
Committee leaders ask GAO to study airline fees Oberstar, Franken send letter to La Hood to decry stranded airline passenger treatment
Contact the Committee
2165 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Phone: (202) 225-4472 Fax: (202) 226-1270
FAA REAUTHORIZATION
q q
Search Search THOMAS for Legislation
H.R. 915, As Passed Report 111-119 on the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009
HPP INFORMATION
q
Search
q
HPP Reform Principles HPP Questionnaire
WATER RESOURCES
http://transportation.house.gov/News/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1008 (1 of 3)9/23/2009 1:17:57 PM
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee: Press Release :: Reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Program
Bay, not only with words, but with bold ideas on how to improve the overall water quality of the Bay. I commend the Administration for their leadership and hope that their increased attention results in greater progress in restoring Bay health. It is my hope that this renewed sense of urgency on behalf of the Bay inspires us all to look at the Bay restoration efforts with similarly improved energy. The Administration has done its part in starting the ball rolling, but it will be our part to see it through to completion. A major item on this Subcommittee’s agenda for the 111th Congress is the reauthorization and strengthening of the Chesapeake Bay Program. I expect that today’s hearing will provide the Subcommittee with information whereby constructive and productive changes can be made as we debate the reauthorization of this legislation. The obstacles to the restoration of the Bay are not insurmountable; however, time and time again we find that we are not meeting goals that we have set for ourselves. Our approach to this reauthorization must be balanced and equitable, yet we must be realistic and ensure that we are addressing underlying pollution problems inhibiting the restoration of the Bay. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I look forward to hearing from today’s witnesses. Statement of The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chairwoman Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment Hearing On “Reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Program” September 22, 2009 Just over a year ago, this Subcommittee held a hearing on the Chesapeake Bay that highlighted its impairments and provided recommendations for its recovery. Today’s hearing is the next step in restoring the estuary. This afternoon we’ll hear from a series of distinguished panelists on the Reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Program. We are pleased that we’ll also have the opportunity to hear from two of our distinguished colleagues from Virginia, Congressmen Gerry Connolly and Robert Wittman. Their districts are, as we know, at the lower end of the watershed – they are literally downstream. As such, they can offer great clarity to a cloudy Bay, and we will look forward to their comments and contributions to this discussion. The combination of a new and committed Administration, an unhealthy watershed, and a dedication to solutions and accountability from both sides of the aisle illustrates that the time to act must be now. But as we discuss the reauthorization of Section 117 of the Clean Water Act and while we call for accountability, we must all set goals of realizing a process for restoring the Bay that is characterized by equity and effectiveness. Speaking plainly, without these elements, the Chesapeake Bay will not be restored. The primary pollutants in the Chesapeake Bay are nutrients and sediment. These pollutants come from a variety of sources – some regulated, others not. The only way we are going to be able to unlock the puzzle that is a dying Chesapeake is through the creation of a fair system wherein those that pollute the Bay are proportionally responsible for cleaning it up. Renewing – and in some cases installing – a sense of accountability will not only result in a healthy and restored Bay, it is the right and just thing to do. EPA tells us that 20% of the nitrogen loadings to the Bay come from waste water treatment facilities; 21% comes from atmospheric deposition; 16% from urban and suburban runoff; and 43% comes from agricultural sources. The waste water treatment community has long been regulated under the Clean Water Act. As such, publicly owned treatment works have been consistent partners with the states of the Bay watershed in reducing nutrient loadings. That said, a number of treatment works have nutrient permit limits that are in excess of levels achievable by current technology. Through trading or technology, these lagging facilities must be brought up to speed. Resolving the issue of atmospheric deposition is a vexing problem. With environmental statutes that remain stove-piped, our ability to get at the fallout of nitrogen onto the waters and landscape of the Bay watershed is handicapped. Through implementation of pending Clear Air Act programs such as the Clean Air Interstate Rule, we can anticipate sizable reductions. Whether these will achieve the gains necessary will remain to be seen – as will the matter of whether there need be closer linkages between the Clean Air and Water Acts. All levels of government – federal, state, and local – must do a better job with urban and suburban stormwater control and mitigation. This is the sole sector in which pollutant loadings are increasing. It is untenable that while 31% of total loadings of phosphorus into the Bay are from urban and suburban sources, only 6% are covered by stormwater permits; that 11% of total nitrogen loadings are from urban and suburban sources, and only 2% are covered by permits; and where 19% of all sediment loadings come from urban and suburban sources, and only 4% of sediment loadings are covered under permits. Many of these stormwater inputs are point source discharges. As such, they must be better brought in under the manifold of this Act. We have now held multiple hearings on the effectiveness of green infrastructure. Given the cost-effectiveness of many of these technologies, development should not be
DEVELOPMENT ACT
q
WRDA 2010 Dear Colleague Letter
http://transportation.house.gov/News/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1008 (2 of 3)9/23/2009 1:17:57 PM
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee: Press Release :: Reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Program
seen as a free pass to pollute. Finally, agriculture is an area in which improvements can and must be made. While nutrient reductions have indeed occurred as a result of the incorporation of best management practices on farms, and the application of regulations to industrial livestock operations, the fact remains that agriculture remains the largest single source of pollutants into the Bay. If we are to clean up the Bay, agriculture must bear responsibility for its proportional share of watershed impairments. The value of the Bay lies not just to the States of Maryland and Virginia. As a member from Dallas, Texas, it is obvious that I live outside of the watershed. Yet I know that restoring this estuary is a matter of great importance. The Bay is, as President Obama recently put it, a national treasure. As such, I recognize we all live downstream – no matter where we, in fact, reside. The benefits of a cleaner Chesapeake Bay will, of course, accrue to the estuary itself. But these benefits are by no means limited to just the Bay proper. A cleaner Bay necessarily means a cleaner Anacostia for the District, a clearer Susquehanna for Pennsylvania, healthier headwater streams in Delaware, a more pristine South Branch of the mighty Potomac River in West Virginia, and a more vibrant Lake Otsego in New York. More accountability, equity and effectiveness means both a healthier Bay downstream, and cleaner waters upstream in which all the people of this watershed may better and more healthily drink, swim, and fish.
An archived video version of the hearing and other supporting information can be found at
transportation.house.gov/hearings/hearingDetail.aspx
###
Home | About the Committee | T&I Agenda | News | Hearings | Reports | Gallery | Minority Web Site
2165 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 Phone: (202) 225-4472 Fax: (202) 226-1270
http://transportation.house.gov/News/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1008 (3 of 3)9/23/2009 1:17:57 PM