![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Independent Federal Advisors on the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
| U.S. Governmental Advisory Committee Independent Federal Advisors on the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation |
Chair Designated Federal Officer |
November 22, 2005
|
Committee
Members Plácido dos Santos Chair Arizona Charles Collette Florida John Duffy Alaska Ronald J. Dutton Texas Lisa Gover New Mexico Sarah D. Lile Michigan Ricardo Martinez California Robert R. Scott New Hampshire Carola G. Serrato Texas Ellen Smyth Texas Colin Soto Arizona Jeff Wennberg Vermont |
The Honorable Stephen
L. Johnson Dear Administrator Johnson: The Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) to the U.S. Representative to the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) met on October 20-21st in San Diego, California. Consistent with desires expressed by the U.S. EPA's Office of International Affairs, this committee spent most of its time discussing the enhancement of private sector participation as a means of addressing the CEC's Puebla pillar of capacity building in Mexico. The committee also addressed specific requests for advice from the EPA regarding three additional topics: 1) budget reform in the CEC, 2) CEC publications procedures, and 3) CEC working groups. Members of the GAC genuinely appreciate the time that you allocated to meet with members of this committee during the June 2005 CEC Council Session in Quebec City, Canada. The committee greatly values the opportunity to fulfill our advisory role in a strengthened manner through personal interaction with you at the Council Sessions. We thank you for taking time from your busy schedule to meet with us and look forward to our next meeting when the Council is scheduled to meet in the United States. We also take this opportunity to express gratitude to Barbara Mcleod, Acting Director of EPA's Office of International Environmental Policy, for her letter dated September 13, 2005. It is very helpful for us to receive such feedback in response to our deliberations and advisory letters. We also take pleasure in recognizing the efforts of EPA's Office of Cooperative Environmental Management (OCEM) for their professionalism and hard work with the administration of the GAC and its non-governmental counterpart, the National Advisory Committee (NAC). In particular we express gratitude to Mr. Oscar Carrillo, the committees' Designated Federal Officer, for his attention to details throughout the year. By virtue of preparatory and follow-up efforts made by Mr. Carrillo and support staff at OCEM, our deliberations proceed smoothly and remain on-mark so that our advice can be of optimal value to the United States government. During our meeting last month, we also had the great pleasure of meeting and getting to know Mr. Rafael DeLeon, the recently appointed Director of EPA's OCEM. We take this opportunity to commend Mr. DeLeon for demonstrating a personal interest in the work of the GAC and NAC by virtue of his presence and active support of our recent deliberations. We recognize that OCEM has broad responsibilities regarding the administration of numerous advisory bodies so we are especially appreciative to him for displaying a strong and clear interest in our work. We also appreciate the participation of Jerry Clifford, U.S. Alternate Representative to the CEC, and Nadtya Ruiz, both from the EPA's Office of International Affairs (OIA). Mr. Clifford's personal interaction with our committee was truly invaluable. The dialogue between Mr. Clifford and the advisory committee members helped focus the committees and led to a specific, time-sensitive objective expressed by EPA during the meeting. Members of the GAC were also pleased to have received written questions from OIA in advance of the meeting as a tool to help provide focus on areas of interest to the U.S. Government. The GAC considers the presence of senior staff from the CEC Secretariat to be a very useful resource for our effective deliberations. We appreciated Doug Wright's presentation and views regarding the organization's activities, budget and direction as established by the parties. The facts and perspectives brought by the Secretariat's senior staff serves to "ground-truth" our discussions while enhancing our own understanding of issues and activities. We thank EPA for accommodating the Secretariat at our meetings. We also express gratitude to Jane Gardner, a member of Joint Public Advisory Committee for her presence at the meeting, thereby promoting effective information exchange among our related advisory bodies. Finally, we would also like to recognize and thank the outgoing members of the GAC, all of whom served with distinction. Stephen Mahfood, the former chairman of the GAC, who made a great contribution with his exemplary leadership and consensus-building skills. We also acknowledge the commitment of our other outgoing colleagues, Michael Colvin, Robert Huston, Karl Kalbacher, James Matz, and Harvey Rubin, for their dedicated service as members of the GAC. In conclusion, we thank you for EPA's continued support of our role in the enhancement of environmental conditions throughout North America and we hope that the U.S. EPA finds our advice useful regarding the ongoing reforms and future strategic direction of the CEC.
|
| cc: | Judith Ayres, Assistant Administrator for EPA's Office of International Affairs |
| Jerry Clifford, Deputy Assistant
Administrator for EPA's Office of International Affairs Rafael DeLeon, Director, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management Dolores Wesson, Chair, U.S. National Advisory Committee Jane Gardner, Chair, Joint Public Advisory Committee Jean Perras, Chair, Canadian National Advisory Committee Members of the U.S. Governmental Advisory Committee |
Administrative
support for the GAC is provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management
Mail Code 1601E, 655 15th St. Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20005
(t)202-233-0072 (f) 202-233-0060
to the U.S. Representative to the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC)
Advice 2005-5: Private Sector Involvement in the CEC
- Ad Hoc Subcommittee—The GAC recommends forming an ad hoc subcommittee composed of NAC and GAC members to explore increasing private sector participation in the work of the CEC:
- The subcommittee's goal would be to heed the challenge from the U.S. Alternate Representative to explore options for developing a strategy with multinationals regarding "greening the supply chain".
- The subcommittee would strive to complete this task in time for the CEC Council Session that is likely to be held in Washington, D.C. during June 2006.
- The subcommittee should include technical advisors, such as a representative of the CEC Secretariat, and a member of the JPAC.
- Business Roundtable—The GAC recommends capitalizing on the networks and contacts built at the April 27th Business Roundtable.
- The GAC recommends that consideration be given to reuniting the Roundtable participants and selecting potential CEC projects for private sector involvement.
- Furthermore, the GAC recommends that consideration be given to using the US-Mexico border region as an "incubator"for the overall concept of enhancing private sector involvement by building on existing international relationships. This includes, state to state relationships, Tribal Nations and Indigenous Community relations, binational environmental recognition programs (such as the Arizona-Sonora AMIGO Program) and private sector engagement in that region.
- Recognition Programs—The GAC recommends that the U.S. Government closely examine the potential value of recognition programs as a reward/incentive mechanism for significant private sector activities that enhance capacity building for environmental protection.
- The GAC recommends that recognition programs would not be implemented only in Mexico; but, consistent with the Puebla pillars, would be carried out on a North American scale.
- The GAC recommends that EPA explore the possibility of creating a trilateral recognition program that could be spearheaded by the Council.
- The GAC presumes that a fundamental tenet for such a successful program would be that all proposed recognition/awards would be contingent on unanimous concurrence by the Parties in advance of the Council Session.
- The GAC also recommends that EPA evaluate its own domestic and international recognition programs such as EPA's Green Suppliers Network (GSN), Performance Track, and the Energy Star, programs as potentially ready mechanisms for recognition of private sector efforts aligned with the Puebla pillars. Close coordination with relevant EPA program offices, and with the other Parties, would be essential for success of such concepts.
- CEC and U.S. Government Working Relationship—The GAC strongly recommends that the CEC Secretariat and U.S. Government maintain a close working relationship on existing and proposed initiatives pertaining to the objective of "greening the supply chain."The GAC is of the opinion that:
- coordination with the Secretariat staff on their current private sector initiatives could help the U.S. and the other Parties produce a more cohesive and lasting legacy of private sector involvement for environmental benefit; and
- the CEC seems to be moving in the right direction by using components of EPA's (GSN) program.
- Consequently, the GAC recommends strengthening CEC/EPA coordination along these lines. The GSN and the Performance Track programs seem to be excellent programs highlighting "greening the supply chain"of large multinationals and providing recognition and rewards to participants.
- Overall, the United States, as the head of the Council, needs to ensure that all activities related to private sector involvement are coordinated and moving in the same direction – especially aligning the work Project #8 titled "Partnerships for Integrated Environmental Management"which allocates C$425,000 for partnerships on greening the supply chain and innovative market-based models for capacity building in Mexico.
to the U.S. Representative to the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC)
Advice 2005-6: CEC Budget Reform
- Full Financial Disclosure—The GAC supports the U.S. Government's efforts to institutionalize full financial disclosure of all Secretariat expenses. Financial transparency is fundamental for evaluation and identification of optimal budgetary allocations to support the continuing work of the CEC. For a wide variety of reasons, we consider transparent financial reporting and budgetary accountability to be vital for success of the CEC.
- Tabulated Matrix—The GAC recommends that future budgetary information should include a tabulated matrix of program area allocations/expenses for the planned upcoming years.
- This would facilitate examination of funding shifts and trends among programs, as activities and priorities change over time.
- The unique nature of the CEC's Mexico liaison office should also be clarified by describing the office's activities as they relate to the CEC's programmatic funding.
- Performance Measures—The GAC recommends incorporating performance measures in the CEC budget and work plan in order to assess and clearly demonstrate the effective use of the parties'financial resources.
- UNEP Format—Overall, the GAC supports using the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) budget reporting template that was provided to the GAC as a possible model for use with the CEC.
Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)
to the U.S. Representative to the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC)
Advice 2005-7: CEC Publications
- Sufficient Guidance—The GAC supports the U.S. Government's attempt to streamline and create accountability in the CEC publications procedure. However, the committee believes there is enough guidance in the NAAEC for processing the variety of documents/reports produced by the Secretariat, such as the Article 13 reports, the Annual Report, and Program Plan and Budget.
- Enhanced Coordination—The GAC recommends closer coordination between the U.S. Government, as a member of the CEC Council, and the Secretariat to prevent the development and issuance of misguided, inaccurate or ineffective reports.
- The GAC believes that the "publications issue" may have emerged from the very broad scope of topics and subject areas found in the CEC's workplan and past portfolio of activities.
- Resolving workplan issues (i.e. defining and prioritizing future activities in the CEC's workplan) may correct most of the Parties'concerns about publications.
- For this reason, the GAC believes the proposed U.S. publication procedures may be overly prescriptive and may not address the root problem.
- Early Involvement—The GAC believes that early detection and attention from the Council is the best way to prevent misunderstandings prior to the development or release of CEC reports.
- The GAC recommends very strong internal communications among all U.S. government personnel that are actively engaged with the Secretariat on myriad issues.
- Chain of Command and Recognition—The GAC supports ensuring a clear chain of command emanating from the Council and flowing to the Secretariat for advance definition of the Secretariat's overall activities and scope.
- The GAC believes that, once direction has been provided, it is important that a degree of independence be preserved for the Secretariat's performance of the prescribed duties and functions.
- In nurturing mutually beneficial relationships among the Parties and the Secretariat, the GAC believes that it is important that the Council provide recognition to the Secretariat for positive performance whenever appropriate.
- Overall, the GAC believes that the issuance of objective, high quality publications can be a useful measure of Secretariat performance but is only possible with strengthened working relationships and clarity of purpose and roles.
Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)
to the U.S. Representative to the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC)
Advice 2005-8: CEC Working Groups
- Current Working Groups—The GAC recommends keeping working groups that were created by a Council Resolution or that are necessitated by a provision of the trilateral agreement.
- "Sunset" Provision—The GAC, however, recommends the establishment of a "sunset"provision for all other ad hoc groups, task forces or working groups.
- Mission Statement/Target Date—The GAC recommends that any proposed working groups be given a clearly expressed mission statement or goal with a target date for completion of its mission or attainment of its goal.
- The GAC recommends a provision for renewal contingent upon the Council's concurrence to avoid conflict with a sunset provision.
- The GAC believes that such provisions will help foster accountability and maintenance of mission-oriented focus by all CEC working groups.
- Puebla Pillars and Corresponding Working Groups—The GAC questions the value or need for working groups to address the topics of Information for Decision-making and Capacity-Building. Information and capacity-building are elements of most projects and, as such, should be incorporated into the activities of most working groups.
- The GAC considers maintenance of the 10(6) Trade and Environment Working Group to be vital because this topic is at the core of the NAAEC and there is a unique contribution to the body of knowledge that emerges from this CEC focus.