5.1 Overview: What Will Be the Air Management Framework of the Future?

A variety of regional air quality management frameworks is being considered in the United States and Canada for managing air pollution. Some are designed to deal with a single issue, such as ground-level ozone or acid rain, or a single pollutant, for example sulphur dioxide. Others are evolving as regional multi-pollutant, multi-issue management regimes. In addition, attempts are being made to determine how the regional frameworks evolving on both sides of the border can be coordinated and applied in border regions.

In examining the various optional frameworks, it is important to distinguish between emission source regions and receptor regions where effects occur. Adverse effects can occur within the emission source regions or in other regions downwind from the primary contributing sources. For some air issues, (persistent toxic substances), the primary source regions and the primary receptor regions of concern may not be coincident; rather they can be quite remote from each other. However, the pollutants can only be controlled where they are emitted. Therefore the frequently referenced concept of "airshed" management may not be appropriate. Rather, the management by emission source region should be considered.

To better appreciate the evolving air management frameworks, it is useful to look at a few examples.

5.2 Single Issue Management Regimes

5.2.1 Management of Ground-Level Ozone

As illustrated in Figure 19, there are several geographic regimes in place or being considered for managing ozone in Eastern North America:

• the Ozone Transport Region (OTR), a formally designated ozone management region under the U.S. Clean Air Act covering 13 states along the U.S. Eastern seaboard
• the Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG) region, a 37-state area covering the eastern half of the U.S., in which options, either applying to the region as a whole or to sub-regions within the OTAG domain, are being considered for managing ozone
• the Regional Ozone Study Area (ROSA), a region including 8 states and an area in southern Ontario which has been jointly delineated by the U.S. and Canada as a logical, scientifically defensible, geographic domain for managing ozone in a transboundary context
• the geographic domains for Regional Smog Management Plans (RSMPs) in southern Ontario, southern Quebec and southern Atlantic areas of central and eastern Canada (there is also a fourth Canadian RSMP in the Lower Fraser Valley of British Columbia)

Figure 19.

5.2.2 Management of Acidifying Emissions

The Sulphur Oxides Management Area (SOMA) is formally designated by Canada in the second Sulphur Protocol under the UN Economic Commission for Europe's Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP).

Whereas the management regime for the first phase of Canada's acid rain program, established in 1985, encompassed the entire territory of the 7 easternmost provinces in Canada, the second phase is honing in on the SOMA, which is the primary Canadian source region contributing to residual acidification. This problem will continue to exist in Eastern Canada in the year 2010 after full implementation of the Canadian phase 1 program and the current U.S. Clean Air Act title IV acid rain program. The SOMA region was also recognized by the U.S. prior to Canada's signing of the second Sulphur Protocol as the only area of Canada contributing to acidification in the U.S. Hence it is a logical source region for managing sulphur dioxide (SO₂) emissions both from the domestic and transboundary perspectives. It is also being considered in Canada as an appropriate geographic domain for managing nitrogen oxide (NO_X) emissions, which contribute to acidification, and for ammonia emissions, which contribute to ambient air particulate loadings.

If fully extended to the transboundary context for addressing acid rain and particulates, the SOMA region might be combined with the sulphur dioxide source region in the U.S. delineated in Figure 20, which has been shown through modelling to be the primary U.S. source region contributing to the acid deposition region of concern in Eastern Canada.

Figure 20.

5.3 Multi-Pollutant, Multi-Effect Management Regimes

5.3.1 U.S. Joint Implementation Program for Ozone, Particulates and Regional Haze

Under the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee, the U.S. is developing an integrated regional approach for implementation of the proposed new ambient air quality standards for particulate matter and ozone and for addressing regional haze. The concept being considered is to delineate Areas of Violation (AOVs), which are air quality problem areas, and Areas of Influence (AOIs), which are emission source regions which contribute most to the problem in the AOVs. Regionally Integrated Plans (RIPs) would be developed to manage emissions within the AOIs, and Regional Air Management Partnerships (RAMPs) would be established to develop these plans.

Various alternatives are being considered for the geographic domains for AOVs and AOIs, recognizing that an AOI where controls are needed may have quite a different geographic extent than an AOV depending on distribution of emission sources, pollutant transport distances and meteorology. The AOI domain could, for example, be a larger region encompassing a smaller AOV domain, or be a completely separate area upwind of an AOV. These options are schematically illustrated in Figure 21.

AOI = Area of Influence
AOV = Area of Violations

Figure 21. Various Options for Defining AOI's with Preliminary Pros and Cons

5.3.2 Canadian Regional Smog Management Plans

At present, four multi-pollutant, multi-effect RSMPs are being developed in Canada. These are initially addressing ozone and particulates, but provide the framework for a consideration of other air pollutants such as air toxics. The four RSMPs under development are for the following geographic areas:

• Lower Fraser Valley of British Columbia
• Southern Ontario
• Southern Quebec
• Southern Atlantic Region (southern parts of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick)

These RSMPs are augmented by a national underlay of measures contained in a National Smog Management Plan (NSMP). The framework of RSMPs to address regional hotspots, a base national program which provides benefits everywhere, is the framework envisaged for the integrated air management in Canada in the future. Additional RSMPs can be added as required. These may need to be considered to fully address particulate and visibility issues since areas covered by the four current RSMPs were originally selected to address ozone. The particulate issue is much more widespread than that of ozone, with ambient particulate concentrations just as high in western Canadian cities (Calgary) as they are in cities within the current RSMP domains such as Toronto.

5.4 Observations

Jurisdictions on both sides of the border are moving towards a more integrated approach to air issues management. Although some single air issue management schemes are still being considered, (e.g. Ozone Transport Assessment Group), both countries appear to be moving towards comprehensive multi-pollutant air management programs for selected emission source regions as a way of managing air quality in the future. Although currently focusing on ozone and particulates, such regional air management programs could be expanded to include all air pollutants of concern being emitted from a given region, including air toxics and greenhouse gases.

With a regionally focused air management program, a need remains for a complementary national program to develop and implement those emission reduction measures that are best regulated at the national level, such as certain measures dealing with vehicles, fuels and consumer products.

Both Canada and the United States have national programs. The structure exists for an overall air management framework that would consist of a combination of national underlay programs designed to reduce emissions everywhere and source region management programs designed to further reduce emissions in key source regions.

An air management framework with a strong regional focus and a comprehensive multi-pollutant approach would seem to offer many advantages over single pollutant, single issue programs:

• improved efficiency for governments, industry, and the individual citizen
• more effective selection of emission control measures, i.e. to address a range of pollutants
• a single comprehensive package of measures for industry, allowing them to better plan for the future
• assurance of environmental integrity by providing geographic control
• introduction of regional orientation to greenhouse gas reduction programs so that measures to reduce greenhouse gases also help solve regional air quality problems
• design and implementation of programs by those directly affected, i.e. in the source regions
• potential joint application in a transboundary context, i.e. joint transboundary air management in selected border regions
• a potential for a common air management framework for North America

The IJC will continue to monitor the evolution of air management frameworks in Canada and the U.S. and make recommendations to governments on their applicability in a transboundary context as appropriate.

5.5 Great Lakes Air Quality Partnership

The U. S. National Park Service, Air Resources Division staff organized a charter gathering of the "Great Lakes Air Quality Partnership," held in Sault Sainte Marie, Ontario in December 1996. At this meeting, representatives from 15 organizations and Indian tribes in the United States and Canada met to discuss the goals of an organization focussed on air quality protection in parks and preserves along the border in the Great Lakes region. Among the participants at the December meeting were U.S. Federal Land Managers (National Park Service, U.S. DA-Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), Parks Canada, Environment Canada, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes Commission, International Joint Commission, state and provincial parks and air quality agencies, and Indian tribes. Those attending the December meeting agreed to form a Steering Committee to represent all of the partners and to organize a spring meeting to officially establish the group and its mission. It was proposed that this meeting be held at the Great Lakes Commission office in Ann Arbor, Michigan in early summer.

Should this group coalesce around a common set of objectives, then it will become the largest of the air quality protection groups formed to date.

5.6 The Paso del Norte Air Quality Task Force

In its deliberations of the Paso del Norte Task Force the Board noted some of the similarities between the Ciudad Juarez/El Paso region and locations on the boundary between the U.S. and Canada including:

• In the Paso del Norte region, as in locations along the U.S.-Canada boundary, nonattainment of ozone standards and elevated levels of carbon monoxide and particulate matter are a transboundary phenomenon.
• Sources are somewhat similar, including vehicles, larger industries and small sources of volatile organic compounds and other contaminants such as auto finishing shops. Unpaved roads and open burning are of greater significance to the Paso del Norte region.
• There are two Commissions overseeing environmental quality in the U.S. Mexican transboundary region, the International Boundary and Water Commission of 1884, (which deals with water quality and quantity issues) and the Border Environmental Cooperation Commission, created under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
• There is also an Agreement on U.S. Mexico Cooperation for the Protection and Improvement of the Environment in the Border Area (the La Paz Agreement of 1983). This Agreement has Annexes, one on sulphur dioxide pollution from copper smelters (a source in Juarez) and Annex V on international transport of urban air.
• The Paso del Norte Air Quality Task Force was instrumental in persuading the federal governments of the United States and Mexico to modify Annex V in 1996 to create the Joint Advisory Committee on Air Quality Improvement for the Paso del Norte Region.
• Creation of the binational Joint Advisory Committee and the opening of an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) border office in El Paso are two of the major accomplishments of the Paso del Norte Air Quality Task Force, a multistakeholder group that has successfully influenced all levels of government, including the federal levels, while documenting pollution sources and sponsoring remedial actions.
• The Task Force is a leader in a study to determine the impact of these pollutants on human health through a co-relation with hospital admissions. Similar work has been completed in part of the United States and Canada.
• Nascent projects, such as the bilateral Clean Cities Corridor Agreement between Detroit and Toronto, (with participation by the U.S. Dept of Energy) and the unilateral Windsor Air Quality Study along U.S.-Canada border could achieve similar milestones.

Based on the Board's interactions in El Paso, the following elements contributed to the success to date of the Task Force in that region.

• effective transboundary linkages

  The Board noted strong bilateral linkages among the academic community, based at the University of Texas at El Paso and the Universidad Autoncoma de CD Juarez, which provided the initial impetus for the Task Force and the scientific justification for its activities, the industrial community, particularly the maquiadores, the political structure, both formal (at the municipal level) and among interest groups, including the Environmental Defense Fund. Strong ties to the academic and medical communities on both sides of the boundary were particularly fruitful.

• effective bilateral definition of the problem.

  An international epidemiological study (organized by Dr. Elaine Barron) examined the ties between high levels of air pollution and reported cases of respiratory disease. The study was linked to the Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) to gain support from hospital administrations on both sides of the border.

• commitment to a 'solution oriented' bilateral activity

  While the opportunity to portray one side of the border as the origin of the majority of the air quality insult exists, there has been recognition that significant sources exist on both sides of the boundary and a broadly-supported binational strategy advocating actions on both sides is most productive.

• effectively scaled solutions

  The Task Force advocated initiatives appropriate to the scale of the pollution sources, from research on modest auto spray painting booths, to a systematic monitoring of international bridge traffic, to oversight of major point sources, such as the copper smelter.

• Charismatic, Sensitive and Persuasive leadership

  The strong sense of commitment, demonstrated by their decade long involvement, and the persuasive abilities and the charisma of the Task Force leadership, particularly Danny Vickers, Dr. Carlos Rincon and Dr. Elaine Barron, were reflected in the response and support the Task Force garnered at the local, state, and federal levels on both sides of the boundary.

5.7 B.C./WA Environmental Cooperation Council Activities

In their meetings held in December 1995 and October 1996, the Council reviewed related work being conducted by the North American Commission on Environmental Cooperation established under NAFTA. It also considered aquifer, cross-border air quality management, and environmental conditions around the border in the Columbia Basin.

A Memorandum of Understanding to clarify the roles and responsibilities of the Department of Ecology (Washington State) and the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (Province of British Columbia) under the 1992 Environmental Cooperation was completed. It commits the parties to:

• establish communications among staff members working on issues with cross-border impacts while providing opportunities for public review and comment
• designate liaison personnel
• establish working relationships with regional representatives of federal agencies to facilitate cooperation

5.7.1 Germane Activities

Columbia River Basin Environmental Protection:

Over the past three years, there has been continuing concern in the vicinity of Northport, Washington about the health impacts of discharges from the Cominco Lead and Zinc Smelter in Trail, B.C.

Cominco has applied to the B.C. Ministry of Environment for an amendment to its air emissions permit; the company held a public meeting in Northport as one method of seeking comment on the draft permit.

The Washington State Department of Ecology evaluated projected arsenic, lead and cadmium emissions from the smelter and concluded that the proposed technology and emissions will meet U.S. standards for all pollutants of concern and endorsed the Ministry's permit conditions. The two agencies are discussing the establishment of additional air monitoring stations in Washington to allow long term assessment of Cominco emissions' impacts. An amended wastewater discharge permit to Cominco will be issued later this year following a similar process.

It is anticipated that, within next few years, Cominco's discharge will meet BC Water Quality Criteria in the Columbia River at Trail.

The Air Quality Task Force continues to meet every six months and is focusing on visibility impairment. Regional haze is an emerging issue because of the proximity of Olympic National Park and North Cascades National Park to the boundary.

Low elevation ozone concentrations are leading to an evaluation of regional ozone levels to allow development of options and recommendations on the most cost-effective approach for dealing with ozone in the Northwest. Several Canadian agencies will be included in this review. There is an intent to formalize the Cascadia Ozone Forum to better coordinate research and planning efforts among Northwest agencies engaged in ozone work, including those in British Columbia.

Under the current MOU, the state and province have consulted on 10 major permits and shared information on 24 minor permits; a sub-committee has been created to reconcile differences between the Washington and British Columbia permitting processes.

5.8 North Eastern States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) and the Eastern Canadian Transboundary Smog Issue Group (ECTSIG) Joint Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) Project⁽¹⁾

With support from CEC, NESCAUM and ECTSIG propose to work with key policymakers and experts in both the U.S. and Canada to analyze airborne pollution (including ozone, NO_X and fine particulate) crossing the eastern portion of the Canada-U.S. border. Both are joining in a pilot project aimed at developing the scientific and policy basis for effective joint management of transboundary airsheds.

NESCAUM is a voluntary, non-profit association of the air quality agencies of eight Northeastern states, including Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. NESCAUM has provided technical expertise and a forum for coordinating regional air quality management efforts to its member states since 1967.

The Eastern Canadian Transboundary Smog Issue Group (ECTSIG) is a workgroup of Environment Canada, with participants representing the environmental agencies of Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia (representatives from Newfoundland and the Prince Edward Islands have been invited to participate).

5.8.1 Objectives for the Pilot Project:

• Identifying the analytical tools and data sources available to characterize the sources and dynamics of long-range air pollution transport.
• Assessing the availability of monitoring and modeling data on both sides of the border and the potential for integrating these data.
• Initiating a dialogue between U.S. and Canadian air regulators, policymakers, and scientific experts as a first step toward sharing information, identifying data gaps and resource needs, and developing a common approach to addressing transboundary transport issues.
• Educating environmental commissioners and premiers in the U.S. and Canada and developing a detailed workplan addressing the longer term joint effort.

5.8.2 Deliverables:

• Complete a concise report synthesizing the best available information that has emerged from recent studies of ozone transport in the eastern United States and Canada. This report will summarize the analytical approaches and data sources available to assess pollution transport on both sides of the border; provide an example of how monitoring data and modeling tools can be integrated to develop quantitative measures of transport; and identify key data needs and information gaps.
• Organize two or more meetings of air regulators, key policymakers, and scientific experts from both sides of the border to educate environment commissioners and premiers, identify key transport concerns, data needs, and opportunities for cooperation and collaboration.
• Work with air regulators and high level policy officials (Eastern Canadian Premiers and New England Governors' Conference) to develop a detailed workplan for subsequent phases of the project by June of 1997.

5.8.3 Timeframe:

The pilot project is to be completed in approximately 6 months. NESCAUM and ECTSIG plan to complete a synthesis ozone transport report in the April-May, 1997 timeframe. A first meeting of U.S.-Canadian experts has been planned for March, 1997 with a follow-up meeting planned for May, 1997.

NESCAUM also has been a party to the nationwide debate in the United States (and to a lesser extent among utilities in Canada) on the potential environmental impacts of state and federal efforts to reshape the electric utility industry, a significant source of smog precursors and pollutants. In written and oral comments submitted to FERC on August 3rd, 1995, NESCAUM stressed the need for a careful assessment of the emissions impacts of restructuring and for the integration of necessary mitigation mechanisms. NESCAUM has investigated the merits of Old Source Review - essentially, bringing older utilities up to the same environmental standards as newer plants - coupled with emissions trading, as one option for levelling the environmental playing field within a competitive utility structure.

NESCAUM also has convened an Energy Workgroup in an effort to strengthen links between air and energy regulators. The workgroup is also seeking to integrate environmental objectives with energy policies in crucial areas such as utility restructuring, and to develop consensus around a comprehensive, region-wide energy plan.

5.9 Commission for Environmental Cooperation

5.9.1 Continental Pollutant Pathways Report

Volume I of the draft interim report prepared by the North American Expert Advisory Panel on Continental Pollutant Pathways, The Continental Pollutant Pathways Report, has been submitted to the Secretariat of the CEC. The Panel was established in the fall of 1996 and has met three times, to date. The meetings were used to a) consider terms of reference, to develop an initial outline of the Panel's report, and to agree on initial drafting assignments, b) to consider, revise and draft initial sections and case examples of the report, and c) to review and revise key sections of the report. The Report has not been reviewed by CEC to date; no executive summary is available to the public.

The purpose of the report was to develop a readable and informative document that provides the technical and non-technical reader with a sense of the nature, extent, complexity, and the importance of continental pollutant pathways, and to demonstrate and inform as to the importance of these pathways to the North American ecosystem and to the health and well-being of its citizens. The goal is to contribute to informed and responsible decisions and actions at the national, corporate, and local levels to prevent and reduce the exposure of humans and the environment to pollutants released to, formed within, or transported through the atmosphere. The report recognizes the cross-media nature of pollutant pathways and focuses on the atmospheric pathways which carry chemical pollutants across boundaries and continents. A number of case studies are presented that, collectively, are broadly representative of many of the unique and generic characteristics of continental pollutant pathways.

The report examines ways of harmonizing the relationship between ecological and economic interdependence for societies and governments and begins with a statement that the three countries (Canada, Mexico and the U.S.) will work together to avoid the risk of national policies that adversely affect neighbours. The report stresses a need to reflect life-cycle (cradle to grave) considerations when establishing a framework of transport and fate analysis of chemical pollutants and adopts a multimedia approach to design methods of preserving overall environmental quality. A number of emerging concerns are considered, including the airborne transport of biological pests and pathogens, exportation of goods and manufacturing technologies, endocrine disruptors, climate change impacts, and the need to endorse the concept of integrated monitoring on a continental scale through the establishment of compatible sampling protocols and scientific approaches. The report acknowledges the complexity of multiple-pollutants and multiple stressors, endorses continuing vigilance to deal with these critical issues, and suggests that the CEC provides a forum for debate and examination of options regarding pollutants on a continental basis.

Section B of the report addresses specific pollutants of concern. Various volatile organic compounds, persistent organic pollutants, mercury, ozone, particulates and oxides of sulphur and nitrogen are all on the list and all are considered in some depth. For each of these pollutants, major problems associated with their release, generic characteristics, sources, pathways, and receptors are discussed.

An updated summary of this report will be included in a future report to the Commission following public release.

5.9.2 The Program on Sound Management of Chemicals

In 1995, the Council, consisting of the three ministers of the environment of the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation, passed Resolution 95-5 on "Sound Management of Chemicals." Recognizing:

• a common ecosystem;
• that transport of toxic substances across national boundaries is a major and shared concern because of living organisms' immune system dysfunction, reproductive deficits, developmental abnormalities, neurobehavioral impairment and cancer, some of them irreversible effects;
• that their remediation can often place considerable strain on the economies as well as the important contribution that producers and/or users can make to the sound management of chemicals;
• the Rio Principles on discouragement of transfer to other states of harmful substances as well as the precautionary approach, as well as the commitments of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978;
• the unique circumstances of NAFTA;
• prevention of pollution and reduction of risk is desirable.

The Council committed to cooperate on sound management of the full range of chemicals, through their life cycle. This cooperation would begin with the development of a regional action plan for PCBs and additional substances, and then consider national timetables, establish a working group aimed to develop recommendations for improving capacity, exchange information, technical cooperation, incorporate pollution prevention principles, encourage public participation, and assess progress.

The Council agreed that the initial work plan for this trilateral program would focus on developing Regional Action Plans (RAP) for PCBs, Mercury, two pesticides (DDT and Chlordane), and the development of Criteria for future regional action plan selection.

Working with the Secretariat of NACEC, the countries formed a Working Group on Sound Management of Chemicals (WGSMC) and four sub-groups. By Autumn 1996, the WGSMC and its sub-groups had produced four draft Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) and a draft report on Criteria for Future RAP Selection.

The main objectives of the Regional Action Plan on PCBs are to: (a) work toward the virtual elimination of PCBs in the environment, which the task force is interpreting as no measurable release to the environment, and the phase-out of uses for which release cannot be contained; and (b) propose environmentally sound steps for the management and control of existing PCBs, throughout their life cycles, with special emphasis given to transboundary shipment of PCBs for disposal/destruction purposes.

The main objectives of the Regional Action Plans on DDT and chlordane are to: (a) reduce the risks to human health and the environment associated with the use of these pesticides; and (b) provide baseline information on the status of DDT and chlordane stockpiles, manufacture, trade and use in the region.

The main objectives of the Regional Action Plan on Mercury are to: (a) assess the mass balance of mercury on the North American continent, including sources: (b) inventory risk-reduction activities to determine how/where they might be applicable to the three Parties; and (c) based on (a) and (b), identity opportunities for continental approaches to reducing risks to human health and the environment. Activities addressed in the draft included the status of mercury monitoring and use; risk management mechanisms and approaches; assessment activities, regional initiatives, and capacity building initiatives.

The main objective of the Report of the Criteria Task Group is to develop refined criteria and test a process and criteria for identifying persistent and toxic substances to be recommended as potential candidates for future regional action.

All of the Regional Action Plans received extensive public comment. However, the RAP for Mercury was criticized by environmental groups, while industry and the CEC-JPAC, the Joint Public Advisory Committee, made up of individuals from senior government, industry, consulting and environmental groups serving in the public interest, were supportive. The Criteria Report also received numerous negative comments and would appear to need substantial revision and possibly another stakeholders review meeting.

The WGSMC and its task groups are currently working to revise the RAPs and the Criteria Report for the Council meeting in the Summer of 1997. It is anticipated that RAPs for two persistent toxic substances will be prepared in 1997, following completion of the development of criteria for their selection by the Chemical Selection Task Force. Implementation of the RAPs will be a major focus of the 1997 Commission workplan. The need for development of a further consensus on the mass balance of mercury and the relative significance of natural vs. anthropogenic sources will be a part of the effort to reduce the releases of this contaminant.

5.10 New U.S. - Mexico Program Directed at Health and Environment Improvements on Common Border

The United States and Mexico have agreed to expand binational efforts to address environmental, public health and natural resources problems faced by more than 10 million people who live on both sides of the border.

A new five-year program, "Border XXI," has been established by four U.S. agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture, and two Mexican agencies, the Secretariat of Environment, Natural Resources and Fisheries and the Secretariat of Health. "Because polluted air, land and water know no boundaries our nations are expanding efforts to protect the environment, health and natural resources for communities on the U.S. and Mexican sides of the border," said EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner. "Our goal is to help make border communities safer and cleaner, especially for children."

Three pillar principles of the plan expand upon previous efforts to improve the border situation:

• expanded plans for public participation in both planning and implementation;
• greater involvement of tribal nations and state agencies;
• enhanced coordination and integration of effort among federal agencies and between federal and state agencies.

The program's objectives are extensive and are outlined in the final "U.S.-Mexico Border XXI Framework Document." They include:

• working in conjunction with state, tribal and local health, environmental and agricultural agencies; reduce and respond to health problems arising from exposure to chemical, physical and biological agents;
• build or upgrade wastewater and drinking water systems;
• reduce air pollution in innovative ways, including expansion of monitoring and control programs;
• improve cross-border collaboration between natural resource and public health entities;
• expand the tracking program for shipments of hazardous and toxic substances across the border;
• promote economic incentive programs for reducing pollution more quickly and cost-effectively;
• promote pollution prevention and recycling in cooperation with industries;
• improve emergency response procedures including free movement of equipment and personnel across the border (in both directions) to deal with chemical emergencies;
• improve and expand protection of species and habitat along the border;
• intensify enforcement of the environmental and health protection laws of both countries, and
• increase public accessibility to desired information, including environmental data.

Reflecting the dynamics of the area, the innovative and flexible program will continue to evolve while addressing the increasingly difficult problems brought on by rapid population and industrial growth in the region, an area extending for almost 2,000 miles and 62 miles on each side of the border. The region encompasses parts of four U.S. states (California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas) and six Mexican states (Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon and Tamaulipas).

Annual reviews of the program will include a reassessment of priorities and implementation plans developed by nine workgroups, progress made toward meeting the five-year goals and development of needed new projects. In conjunction with these reviews, comments will be solicited from public advisory boards. A biennial public comment period is planned to assure further community input.

Building on a long history of bilateral cooperation, the new plan aims to achieve sustainable development along the border by integrating the work of institutions created under the North America Free Trade Agreement and its environmental side agreement, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission, the North American Development Bank, and Commission for Environmental Cooperation, as well as the International Boundary and Water Commission. The need to focus on regional solutions prompted the organization of the plan into five bilateral regions, California-Baja California, Arizona-Sonora, New Mexico-Texas-Chihuahua, Texas-Coahuila-Nuevo Leon, and Texas-Tamaulipas.

The plan reflects resolutions made at the last meeting of the U.S./Mexico environmental commission of the 10 border states concerning binational cooperation on economic growth and environmental issues.

The "U.S.-Mexico Border XXI Framework Document," with the Executive Summary and the working groups' 1996 Implementation Plans, is available on the U.S.-Mexico Home Page at http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder. Copies also are available from EPA's Border Offices: 610 West Ash St., Suite 703 (Att: Border XXI) San Diego, Calif., 92101, phone 619-235-47645; and 4050 Rio Bravo, Suite 100 (Att: Border XXI) El Paso, Texas 79902, phone 915-533-7273.

1. Excerpts from "Assessing the Long-Range Transport of Airborne Pollutants Between the Eastern U.S. and Canada" (W. Draper)

URL: http://www.ijc.org/rel/boards/iaqab/r23-ch5.html