Recognizing the federal government and the states in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed will not meet the 2010 deadline for improving water quality sufficiently to remove the Chesapeake Bay from the federal ‘dirty waters’ list by 2010, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation issued itsfirst federal blueprint for restoration.

 

Restoring Clean Water and the Chesapeake Bay: A Plan for America’s Next President outlines 16 specific actions that the next administration and Congress must take to reduce pollution, meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act, and improve local economies.

 

“While the Bay states have begun to step up to the plate and take action to reduce pollution, on clean water the Bush administration has been missing in action,” said CBF President William C. Baker.

“Clean water is a right, not a luxury, and in the past has had both Democratic and Republican presidents as champions. The federal government has the responsibility, and the resources, to make Chesapeake Bay restoration a model that can be replicated across the country.”

 

The plan is a detailed prescription for federal action to clean up and restore the Chesapeake Bay and the nation’s waterways. The 16 actions that comprise CBF’s plan would reduce pollution from agriculture, sewage, urban runoff, automobiles, and power plants, and improve water quality in local rivers, streams, and the Chesapeake Bay.

 

Among the 16 recommended actions are:

 

1. The president should direct the Environmental Protection Agency to ensure full and timely compliance with the Bay-wide pollution budget (Total Maximum Daily Load) being developed for the Chesapeake. The pollution budget will include pollution caps for regulated sources like sewage treatment plants as well as caps for nonpoint sources, like stormwater runoff, much of which is currently unregulated. In Pennsylvania, 59 percent of the nitrogen pollution in local rivers, streams, and the Chesapeake Bay comes from urban, suburban, and farmland runoff. The next president must work with Congress to give the EPA more leverage to ensure the states reduce this source of pollution.

2. He should direct the U.S. Department of Agriculture to prioritize conservation assistance to hotspots—those regions providing the highest pollution loads. In Pennsylvania, U.S. Geological Service data show more than twice as much nitrogen pollution coming from hot spot areas like the Upper Susquehanna/Lackawana watershed (11.6 pounds per acre annually) than other areas like the Upper West Branch of the Susquehanna watershed (5.4 pounds per acre annually). Not only should the limited conservation funding be focused, but it also should be targeted to practices that provide the greatest water quality benefits.

3. He should set a goal of zero discharge of pollution from federally funded highways, and working with Congress, utilize a small portion of federal transportation funding to install proven technologies to reduce highway runoff. Federally funded roadways generate pollution from car and truck emissions, and trap nitrogen, carbon particles, heavy metals, and other pollutants and funnel them to local waterways. The majority of federal roadways were built without pollution runoff controls.

4. And, he should support No Child Left Inside legislation, which provides incentives for states to develop environmental literacy plans and funding for high-quality, environmental instruction. Such plans will help states demonstrate how they will incorporate outdoor and environmental instruction and ensure that their graduates are environmentally literate. It is essential that we prepare today’s students to tackle tomorrow’s environmental issues.

“Investing in clean water is also an investment in local economies, paying dividends by creating jobs, increasing recreational opportunities, and improving the quality of life,” Baker said.

The plan,Restoring Clean Water and the Chesapeake Bay: A Plan for America’s Next President, is available online.