- Mission [1]
- The National Advisory Committee (NAC) supports the agency’s mission of protecting human health and the environment. Its advice
assists the EPA Administrator on achieving the goals of safeguarding the natural environment--air, water, and land, via trilateral
activities in the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). The CEC is a trilateral institution created by the North
American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC) and funded by the Governments of the United States, Mexico and Canada.
The NAC provides the EPA Administrator with policy perspectives from academia, the private sector and environmental NGO’s.
Their advice is useful to the U.S. Government as it negotiates the cooperative Operational Plan with Canada and Mexico and
prepare for the outcomes of the Environment Ministers annual meeting. Each year the committee reviews and provides advice
on two major CEC products. One is the tri-annual Operational Plan and secondly is the CEC’s Annual Council Session. The Operational
Plan sets tri-lateral priorities for environmental management in North America, such as enhancing environmental information,
the sound management of chemicals, and conserving biodiversity. The Operational Plan undergoes tri-lateral review on an annual
basis. The committee plays an important role in helping define the themes and outcomes of the annual CEC Council Session.In
fiscal year 2011 the NAC completed two advice letters and eight recommendations to EPA on a variety of North American environment
and trade policy issues related to the CEC. The committee met twice in fiscal year 2011. In addition, EPA Administrator Jackson
met in person with representatives of the committee at the CEC 2011 Council Session in Canada. The main accomplishments of
the Committee are summarized below:The committee’s December 31, 2010 advice letter contains recommendations on four topics:
1) Submission Enforcement Matters, 2) CEC Strategic Plan and Future Projects, 3) Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment
(TEIA) and 4) Project Selection Criteria for the North American Partnership for Environmental Community Action (NAPECA). The
U.S. Government (USG) replied with a comprehensive letter to the NAC on February 28, 2011 addressing their recommendations.
The USG replied to advice #1 by thanking them for their valuable comments. The Government promised “to undertake comprehensive
review of the SEM process to improve, modernize and make it more efficient. This will ensure that the submission process will
be carefully and thoroughly considered. The USG replied to advice #2 describing that at the present time the Parties are trying
to focus the work of the CEC, and that perhaps in the future there will be an opportunity to explore other projects. Regarding
Article 13th, the Government described that if the CEC Secretariat presented a proposal the U.S. would consider its merits.
The USG replied to advice #3, by expressing its interest in revisiting the TEIA matter. The Government shared that differences
in federal structures among the three NAAEC Parties have hampered TEIA negotiations in the past. However, “it promised to
take a fresh look at the issue…” The USG responded positively to advice # 4 on the project selection criteria for the NAPECA
grants. It responded by stating that the Strategic Plan includes criteria identifying how the activity coincides with Council
priorities. Finally, the USG acknowledged the value of the committee’s advice… in helping understand the views of the public
on critical environmental issues in North America.” The committee’s May 16, 2011 advice letter contains recommendation on
four major topics: 1) North American Indigenous Subcommittee, 2) Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment (TEIA) 3) CEC
2010-15 Strategic Plan and Future Projects, and 4) and Submissions on Enforcement Matters. The U.S. Government (USG) replied
with a comprehensive letter to the NAC on June 9, 2011, addressing the status of their recommendations. The USG responded
to advice #1 by stating that “it would agree to work within the existing framework, as the limited resources presently available
make it very hard to support a separate subcommittee. The USG committed to looking at other opportunities… where it could
highlight indigenous people’s issues. For example it highlighted a CEC NAPECA grant supporting environmental work in the Red
Lake Band of the Chippewa. Regarding advice #2 on TEIA, the Government informed the committee that it had started to take
a fresh look at the issue and that it would be consulting with the State Department and other agencies to assess the prospects
of resuming negotiations.” The USG responded to advice #3, on the 2010-15 Strategic Plan and Future Projects with three specific
comments. First it agreed with presenting an executive summary which would include context for each project. Second, it explained
“that a process and structure for the projects in the Operational Plan already exists and it consists on reaching consensus
among the Parties on activities….” The third response addresses budgetary constrains with including PRTR data on climate change
projects and explains that climate projects could include adaptation components in the future. The USG concurred that adding
an interactive social media component to the projects is a good idea, but that it would not want to create barriers to communities
without access to the technology. Regarding advice #4 on enforcement submission matters, the U.S. informed the committees
that the US had already taken steps to ensure that the advice provided by the NAC is a keystone of the U.S. positions moving
forward. The U.S. also shared its interest in ensuring engagement and transparency with JPAC and the NAC and GAC during 2011
and prior to the release of the SEM trilateral review results at the 2012 Council Session. Finally, the USG acknowledged the
value of the committee’s advice… in helping understand the views of the public on critical environmental issues in North America.”
|
