Beneficial Uses
“The  Commission  anticipates  that  the  Parties’
“According to Annex 2 of the Agreement, delisting follows
efforts to develop guidance on the delisting process
the restoration of beneficial uses.  The U.S. document
identifies that in order to delist an AOC, restoration of
will  encourage  increased  resources  and  the
beneficial uses is required.  While it is implicit in the
coordination of efforts in each AOC and will result
documents reviewed, the Commission recommends that
the Canadian documents explicitly state that in order to
in the more timely achievement of the goals of the
delist an Area of Concern the end point is the restoration of
Agreement.”
beneficial uses.  The Commission is aware, however, that
this is the policy of Canada and Ontario and that the two
parties have consulted substantively on this matter.
“The Canadian documents describe a process through
Reporting
which, upon completion of implementation of remedial
actions, an Area of Concern can be recognized as an area of
“The Agreement states in Annex 2 Section 4 (d) that
recovery.  Consideration of other factors such as
Remedial Action Plans shall be submitted to the Commis-
sustainability or locally defined goals is acceptable provided
sion for review and comment at three stages, one of which
they are in addition to and do not replace the requirements
is when monitoring indicates that identified beneficial uses
of the Agreement.  The Commission’s 1991 Delisting
have been restored.  The Commission expects that Stage 3
Criteria ... provide guidance for consideration for each
Reports will be included in any delisting process unless the
beneficial use.
Parties formally revise the Agreement.
Documentation
Consultation with the Commission
“The Commission is of the opinion that all the relevant
“Given the importance of Annex 2 and the RAP restoration
documents be publicly available.  This is the case with the
process to achieving the Agreement’s purpose and the
... U.S. document.  The Commission recommends that the
value of ongoing communication, the Commission believes
policies of Canada and Ontario be made available in a
that informal consultation with the Director of the Great
single public document, and if such a document does in
Lakes Regional Office followed by formal consultation with
fact exist, that the Commission be provided with such
Commissioners is both desirable and appropriate.
along with information on how the public can access the
document.
“The Commission is pleased that the Parties are looking
ahead to delisting some of the Areas of Concern, and that
Clarity
they are attempting to be transparent in describing their
policies and procedures.  To further this goal, the Parties
“The WQB noted that some of the wording in the Canadian
may wish to consider development of a single binational
and U.S. documents is open to interpretation.  For ex-
guidance document applicable to all AOCs which also
ample, achieving “locally defined goals” could imply that
addresses the organizational differences in the two coun-
achieving something less than the purpose and objectives
tries.  At the least, Canada and Ontario should revise and
of the Agreement is fully acceptable.  While there may be
disseminate a single comprehensive guidance document.
cases when incomplete restoration of beneficial uses is
justifiable, the Commission seeks reassurance that the
“The Commission anticipates that the Parties’ efforts to
Agreement purpose not be compromised by any of the
develop guidance on the delisting process will encourage
material presented in the guidance documents, and
increased resources and the coordination of efforts in each
recommends that language in delisting guidance docu-
AOC and will result in the more timely achievement of the
ments be made explicit as to intent.
goals of the Agreement.”
Surveillance and Monitoring
“The Commission notes that the documents clearly state
that monitoring is required to determine that beneficial
uses have been restored and then subsequently maintained
and seeks assurance that such monitoring is necessary and
sufficient to measure recovery of beneficial uses.
64