Report on the meeting of the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) and National Advisory Committee (NAC) held in San Antonio, Texas on January 27, 2000

By Cyrus Reed, Texas Center for Policy, Austin, Texas

On January 27th, I attended the first day of a two-day meeting of the two U.S. advisory groups to the U.S. representative -- namely EPA chief Carol Browner -- to the Commission for Environmental Cooperation. The NAC and GAC meet periodically. This is a very brief account of the meeting. Obviously, the observations are my own and do not reflect any official policy of the U.S. EPA, GAC or NAC.

Because both Greg Block and Scott Vaughan from the CEC were held up in airports due to snow storms, EPA' s Environment and Trade Policy Coordinator John Audley began the meeting by giving a briefing and seeking GAC and NAC member input on the Ministerial Meeting, proposed for June12th and 13th. Potential sites for the meeting include Annapolis, Baltimore and Chicago. The issue is essentially is it better to hold the meeting in the Washington, D.C. area or in Chicago. Participants had varying opinions on the meeting site.

Audley then said the criteria for the meeting success would be that substantive issues need to be on the agenda, the audience needs to be expanded, and other agencies -- notably those involved in trade -- USTR, Commerce -- need to be involved. Audley then discussed the format of the meeting and how the format might contribute to meeting these objectives. One possible idea is to have a day before the two-day meeting to provide space for NGOs, including environmental groups, business associations, etc. to hold workshops on a variety of topics to peak interest in the CEC meeting and potentially expose governmental representatives to topics of interest to the wider community. The CEC might also sponsor workshops either on this "pre-meeting day," or on the actual first day of the meeting itself. Audley reiterated that this was merely an idea that had not been approved by EPA, but which might lead to more interest in the CEC. He stressed that neither CEC nor EPA would have translation or workshop money. A variety of opinions were then expressed about the importance and need for the workshops and whether it would be effective.

Discussion then turned to how the public itself would interact with the three ministers during the public sessions. Most participants agreed that merely having a two-minute limited public session would be unfortunate, and that there should be opportunity for ministers to respond to people's comments. One suggestion universally approved was that ministers should respond to previous years comments about what had been done to address specific issues and that if possible, issues raised during the Ministerial meeting could be addressed by the three members. It was also agreed that highlighting some programs as well as NAFEC grantees projects could be beneficial to the overall meeting.

Following lunch, several invited guests presented regional issues. Jim Yarborough of EPA region VI reported on Big Bend Air Quality Programs and the progress and stumbling blocks in negotiation between the U.S. and Mexico on the issue. Essentially, after negotiations failed on a joint "tracer" study (known by its acronym BRAVO) to help identify the major contributors to the haze and visibility problems at Big Bend National Park, the U.S. went ahead and conducted the study on U.S. soil only. He was optimistic about the results helping get the U.S and Mexico back to the table. Karen Chapman of TCPS and Ernesto Enkerlin from Pronatura Noreste then reported on their joint Binational Laguna Madre Initiative (http://www.texascenter.org/lmproject.htm). The project seeks to bring attention and action to the unique Texas/Tamaulipas coast and estuary system. Essentially, they with a binational advisory committee are trying to get the Laguna Madre on people's radar screen because of its environmental and economic importance. John Herron from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department then spoke about TPWD's Avian Protection Programs, including the coastal bird programs. TPWD has numerous programs to attempt to preserve important bird habitat and have been participating in meetings with Mexican officials to help identify and preserve bird habitat in Mexico used by birds which also inhabit Texas. TPWD has been using money from TXDOT to advertise through maps the numerous coastal birding opportunities in Texas (http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us). Finally, James Matz and Elaine Lockhart from Valley Proud Environmental Council reported on their organization in the Rio Grande Valley, which has won numerous awards and has for a decade sponsored hundreds of trash clean-ups, beach clean-ups, recycling days throughout the Valley.

After the presentations, Greg Block and Scott Vaughan presented an update on CEC programs and activities. Block reported that there have been 22 submissions on Articles 14 and 15, 12 of which are currently active (in the decision-making phase). In addition, the CEC recently published on-line the comments on the Mercury Action Plan, which Block sees as a positive development. The PRTR --Pollutant Release and Transfer Registry -- continues to be a contentious issue, although progress in Mexico has been made. Air Quality continues to be strategic issue for the CEC, and the CEC is working with an organization that represents over 200 air quality managers. In the conservation and biodiversity area they are getting reactions to the North American State of the Environment Report and intensifying work on the ecoregion concept. The continent-wide North American Bird Conservation Initiative gives a structure for private and public entities to come together and has been successful. Finally, the Transboundary Environmental Impact Agreement has proceeded along the development of voluntary state-to-state and state-to-province agreements due to the impossibility to reach agreement between the three countries. CEC will work with the Western Governor's Association on this issue as well.

Block also said that 3 staff positions have attracted over 100 CVs each and they were close to interviewing the short list of candidates.

Scott Vaughan then reported on the Trade and Environment Program at CEC, highlighting 5 of the 12 project areas. The intent of all programs is to build greater linkage between trade, economics and biodiversity and environment. Vaughan highlighted the recent Shade-Grown Coffee report as well as work on ecolabeling as key, concrete results from the focus on the linkage. Still, Vaughan saw the work thus far as falling short of possibilities. The CEC held an experts forum with the three parties on trade, investment and environmental policies that was successful. In December, the CEC finally held the Article 10 (6) meeting about the trade ministry (Free Trade Commission), environmental ministry (ie.CEC) linkage. The good news is that the debate has changed and there is a focus on three issues: the relationship between the precautionary approach and trade issues; bio-safety; and environmental labeling. There will be a joint meeting with the FTC on labeling and harmonization as part of this third aspect.

Vaughan also said there had been a good response to the call for paper for the North American Symposium on Trade and Environmental Linkages. 12 to 15 of the papers will be accepted and up to $15,000 per proposal will be provided to the authors.

The CEC is just beginning the Article 13 Study on Electricity Restructuring, as all three countries move toward deregulation. What are the environmental consequences, possibilities for green energy markets? Vaughan asked participants for lists of names of experts on these issues.

Finally, Vaughan said working on the Critical and Emerging Trends (in environment) of North America, looking at alternatives for the year 2020.

I then had to leave to take Ernesto Enkerlin to the airport and there ends my report. Again, I want to remind those that these are merely my own thoughts on the matter, no one else's.