THE  INECE  NEWSLETTER
                                                                        !=eiiiilSEPTEMBER..2QCIOL
                International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement
              __T_             Harnessing the Power of Markets and Public Disclosure for
          bsueNumber             Environmental Compliance and Enforcement
3                                 Documented successes, notably in developing countries, are demonstrating not
                                 only the power of traditional compliance monitoring and enforcement, but also
                                 new combinations of market mechanisms and public disclosure. These strategies
                                 are producing significant improvements in environmental compliance and environ-
1N THIS ISSUE                     mental results without sacrificing economic growth. Spotlighting this are:
..     .  ..  _     ซ.. , ,   _,     • A report on the new publication of a World Bank Research Report, October
SSSD^H^f,^ฐWer             1    1999> entitied: "Greening Industry: New Roles for Communities, Markets, and
• UUlIw UIouIUoUlw .•.(..••(••.MI..>..ป..>..M......... I    —.          „ .  . ,     i ,,        *
                                 Governments in this newsletter - page 4
Unprecedented International             . An artjc|e on North America's Commission for Environmental Cooperation public
Cooperat.on benefits Enforcement	1    statement and 10 point guideline to align environmental management systems
INECE goes Interactive	1    including IS014001 certification with delivery of regulatory compliance and improved
                                 environmental performance - page 2
CEC Issues Guidance Document	2      .   ...  .  ,   .  ,    ,  ,  ,     . x   ,        ,    .  .     . ,
                                 • An editorial on involvement of enforcers in trade policy and negotiations reinforcing
G-8 Lyon Group Environmental Crime      the timeliness of a new UNEP publication - pages 3 and 5
Project Update	2               	

Why Enforcement Officials Should be      Unprecedented International Cooperation Benefits Hazardous Waste
involved in Trade Po.icy	3    Enforcement
PUBLICATIONS and STUDIES	4    T.          .      .„     ...    Jt  .  . .    ... _,ซ
                                 Three companies, one in Sonora, Mexico and two in Arizona, United States agreed
INECE NEWS	5    to pay penalties totaling over $50,000 for violating U.S. hazardous waste laws, in
ENFORCEMENT HIGHLIGHTS             a cooperative law enforcement action along the U.S.-Mexico border. This is the
  Clean Air                    7    ^'rst t'me tna*a Mexican facility has been fined for not complying with the U.S.
  _      """"	'.	     environmental laws. All three companies have been working cooperatively to
  tndangered bpecies	7    reso|ve the violations with the U.S. EPA. The Mexican Federal Attorney General
  Agricultural Chemicals	 10    for tne Environment (PROFEPA), the Mexican National Ecology Institute (INE),
  Hazardous Waste	11    the U.S. Customs Service, and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
  Drinking Water	11    have worked with the EPA to develop the case.  The Mexican  company has
  O'l Spills	11    agreed to pay a $3,164 penalty and to train other Mexican firms sending waste to
  Ecosystem	11    the U.S on the U.S. and Mexican legal requirements forthe shipment of hazardous
REGIONAL NETWORK NEWS                           (International Cooperation - Continued on page  11)

  Americas Region	13    ESECEto Support Interactive Networking and Capacity Building
  Africa/Middle East Region	14    To realize its full potential as a practitioner network, within the next several weeks
  Asia and Pacific Region	15    tne 'NIECE Secretariat will complete changes to the INECE website, www.inece.org,
                              ';   to support more free flowing communication on general issues and special topics
                              1   related to environmental compliance and enforcement through bulletin boards and
                                 chat rooms. The Secretariat will continue to respond to requests for assistance
CONTACTS                     R    and information through this and other means. Letters have been sent to at least
         	"	     two potential international co-chairs for each of five special topic FORUMs designed
EDITORIAL BOARD	9    to support focused exchanges and full internet based services ranging from contacts
NEWSLETTER STAFF              9    to tra'n'n9 anc' implementation materials, such as inspection protocols, to lessons
                              :   learned and opportunities for enforcement cooperation. See  more information in
	  			   the INECE News section page 5.

-------
CEC issues Guidance Document - "Improving
Environmental Performance and Compliance: 10
Elements of Effective Environmental Management
Systems"
The United States, Canada and Mexico have agreed for the
first time that voluntary Environmental Management Systems
("EMS") designed for internal management purposes may, if
effectively implemented, also serve the broader public policy
goals of compliance assurance and improved environmental
performance in regulated and non-regulated areas throughout
North America. On June 13, the environmental ministers of
the three countries, in their annual council meeting, as the
North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation,
endorsed a guidance document on this voluntary use of EMS
as a way to help organizations improve environmental their
performance and move  beyond compliance.
The guidance document titled: "Improving Environmental
Performance and Compliance: 10 Elements of Effective
Environmental  Management System" (the "Guidance
Document11) has been  produced by the North American
Working Group on Environmental Enforcement and
Compliance Cooperation ("Enforcement Working Group"), a
trilateral group formed under the Commission, is now final.
The Guidance  Document lists 10 elements that are
compatible with many EMS models currently in use ("10
Elements"). The Guidance Document is not meant to be a
new or competing system. Instead, it is intended to provide
a simple way of checking whether an existing or planned
EMS includes elements to help users meet public policy
needs of regulatory compliance and environmental
performance that moves beyond compliance. It should be
noted  that, while  an EMS is an important  internal
management tool, it does not replace the regulatory system
nor does its adoption constitute compliance.
The 10 Elements:
1. Environmental Policy
2. Environmental Requirements and Voluntary Undertakings
3. Objectives and Targets
4. Structure, Responsibility and Resources
5. Operational Control
6. Corrective and  Preventive Action and  Emergency
Procedures
7. Training, Awareness and Competence
8. Organizational Decision-Making and Planning
9. Document Control
10.Continuous Evaluation and Improvement
The three parties have prepared the Guidance Document
with the goal of assisting EMS  users make responsible
decisions and take action to achieve better environmental
performance through maintaining compliance with
environmental laws and moving beyond compliance. The
guidance also was supported by the Multi-State Working
Group  on Environmental Management Systems, a voluntary
organization comprised of government representatives,
numerous business and trade associations, and several
environmental :public interest organizations and universities.
Further information is available at www.cec.org. The EMS
guidance information is available atwww.epa.gov/oeca.:,

G-8 Lyon Group Environmental Crime Project Update
The G-8 Nations' Lyon Group Law Enforcement Project on
Environmental Crime continued to make progress. It last
convened in Naples, Italy, on February 2-3, 2000. Initiated
to improve information exchange, data analysis,  and
cooperation among law enforcement agencies, regulators,
and international organizations to better detect international
illegal shipments and investigate the potential for organized
crime associated with them, the Environmental Crime Project
meeting and subsequent bilateral efforts have made
operational progress on several fronts.
International Cooperation to Detect Illegal Shipments
Participants from several nations have begun to bring together
environmental  compliance and enforcement data and
Customs data to detect shipments that violate their own
national environmental laws. Three investigations initiated
for illegal shipments of tons of banned ozone depleting
substances (ODS) were detected through this means of
tracking the illegal trafficking of ODS from Asia, through
Europe, and into North America.
Internet Systems to Share Compliance and
Enforcement Data
The Environmental Crime Project has developed models for
sharing and analyzing  environmental compliance and
enforcement data and Customs data nationally and
internationally over secure Internet systems, and has begun
to implement aspects of these systems between nations
on a bilateral basis.  Comparing environmental compliance
and  enforcement data and Customs data on the local,
national, and international levels has been extremely difficult,
resource-intensive, and timeconsuming, so much so that
the crucial data often came too late to  detect illegal
shipments. The Internet system enables Customs and other
law enforcement agencies to detect suspect shipments as
they go through Customs, and allows  investigators to
determine the regulatory status and compliance history of
suspect shipments, organizations, and individuals. The
system is available to any country interested in participating.
Trade Regimes and Environmental Enforcement
The Environmental Crime Project has been able to better
identify automated customs, trade and investigative
processes that can improve the tracking of shipments of
waste and ODS.This puts the Project Team in a good position
to advise current efforts to improve the compatibility of
customs coding and systems with environmental regulatory
agency data systems and control regime, to identify how
emerging electronic reporting frameworks can  be
incorporated  into new trade agreements, Customs
automation projects, and into broader efforts to integrate
various law enforcement and compliance data to detect illegal
shipments at seaports.
The INECE Newsletter

-------
Advanced Technologies to Deter Environmental Crime
The Environmental Crime Project has explored and agreed
to move forward with the collaborative use of advanced
technologies, including satellite imaging, digital mapping of
territory, GPS tracking, and link analysis through improved
information management and analysis to better detect
environmental crimes. Satellite images, for example, can
be used to detect illegal dumping of oil and waste at sea.
The satellite image and ship's location can then be faxed to
the Coast Guard for further investigation. A presentation by
the Environmental Crime Prevention Program (ECPP), an
intergovernmental organization in Naples, illustrated the use
of satellite images in detecting environmental crime. Using
historical satellite images from Telespazio's Fucino Space
Center, the ECPP staff discovered that a small lake outside
of Naples was gradually disappearing.  Subsequent
investigation established that the lake had been illegally filled
with waste by organized crime.  Both ECPP and Telespazio
indicated their willingness to pursue collaborative use of
satellites  and information analysis in support of the
Environmental Crime Project. j|j!.
Michael Fenders, Special Counsel, Office of Criminal Enforcement,
Forensics & Training,  U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency,
penders.michael@epa.gov


Trade Liberalization and Environmental Protection:
Why Enforcement Officials Should Be Involved
in Trade Policy - An Editorial1

To achieve environmental  protection, we need strong
regulatory systems and effective  enforcement of those
systems. Trade liberalization, achieved through breaking
down barriers to the free flow of goods, services and
investments, is compatible with strong regulations and
effective enforcement if trade policies are developed with
sensitivity to environmental protection and enforcement.
Environmental enforcement officials can and should play a
key role in the development of trade policy for two main
reasons. First, with their special knowledge of environmental
regulatory and enforcement programs, they can ensure that
trade and investment rules do not undermine the integrity of
these programs. Second, these officials can also help ensure
that trade and investment policies promote environmental
protection and enforcement, and do not lead a country to
lower its standards to attract trade and investment.
Free trade is achieved through bilateral and multilateral
agreements, such  as those under the World Trade
Organization (WTO) and the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA). These agreements establish rules on
how parties to the agreements (i.e., nations) may implement
their domestic  policies,  such as requirements that
regulations do not discriminate between or among other
parties, that regulatory practices are open to the public, and
that parties avoid trade protectionist barriers. These rules
are important for providing a level economic playing field.
On their own, however, they can constrain a party's ability
to develop and implement regulations to  protect the
environment, for example by rendering that  party's
regulations open to challenge by other parties or their citizens
outside the domestic court process. We have already seen
challenges to parties' clean air, species protection and
hazardous materials regulations in the WTO and claims by
investors concerning the regulation of toxic chemicals against
the U.S., Mexico and Canada under the NAFTA.
New trade and investment agreements can and do contain
provisions to protect regulatory and enforcement authority.
For example, the WTO and NAFTA contain general
statements about the importance of environmental protection
and sustainable development, exceptions for  certain
measures to protect the environment and natural resources,
and specific provisions in the sections pertaining to food
safety and technical regulations that seek to ensure parties
can achieve their chosen levels of protection
As to the second  concern that trade and investment
agreements actually promote environmental protection and
enforcement rather than encourage a lowering of standards,
environmental enforcement officials can again play a key
role in trade and investment  agreements by drafting
provisions or contemporaneous side agreements that call
for high levels of environmental protection and effective
enforcement and that discourage the lowering of standards.
These provisions can be made binding through state-to-state
dispute procedures or public submissions.  An example is
the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
(NAAEC), a side agreement to the NAFTA, which establishes
mechanisms for citizens to question the effective enforcement
of environmental laws and for parties to bring proceedings
against others for persistent failures to enforce environmental
laws.  The NAFTA itself contains a provision discouraging
the lowering of environmental standards to attract investment
and providing state-to-state consultations for perceived
violations of the provision.
How can enforcement officials effectively participate in the
development of trade policy?
1. Early and consistent  participation in internal decision
making - All interested agencies, including environmental
enforcement  officials, need to be able to describe how
proposed agreements might affect their programs and work
with others to mitigate those impacts. To be effective, such
discussions should begin as early as possible in the
development of trade  and investment policies and
agreements.  In the U.S., there is a vibrant interagency
process to develop trade and investment policies that includes
officials from environmental protection and enforcement
agencies.
2.  Participating in  the Preparation  and Conduct of
Negotiations - Once an agreement is under consideration,
environmental enforcement officials can help identify areas
of concern and help craft textual provisions to address those
concerns.  By  participating in the negotiations of the
agreements and in any efforts to reach contemporaneous
agreements on environmental protection and enforcement,
                                             The International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement

-------
the officials can help explain to other parties their concerns
and proposals. Their presence on delegations also serves
to signal the importance placed by their country on
environmental protection in the trade context. Enforcement
officials should play a particularly prominent role in the
negotiation  of contemporaneous  agreements  on
environmental protection and enforcement.
3.  Assessing the Impacts of Trade Policy - In the U.S.,
environmental assessments were conducted of the Uruguay
Round of the WTO, the NAFTA, and more  recently the
proposed accelerated tariff liberalization of forest products
in the WTO,  with the full participation of environmental
officials.  Last November, the Clinton Administration
established by Executive Order a requirement to perform
environmental assessments of major trade agreements and
called on environmental officials to play a lead role. Guidelines
for implementing this Order are now being developed and
should provide a good example. Enforcement officials can
be particularly helpful in assessing the likely regulatory and
enforcement impacts of trade agreements and can also help
develop appropriate policies and  proposals to mitigate
               negative impacts.
               4. Interacting with Civil Society - Finally, public input can
               play a critical role in developing trade and investment policies
               and agreements, since public acceptance is key to the
               success of these endeavors.  Enforcement officials are in
               the best position to understand public concerns expressed
               about how these policies and agreements might affect the
               programs that they implement and enforce.
               In conclusion, both free trade and environmental protection
               are important goals that can be made compatible through
               careful consideration, cooperation and coordination, which
               can best be achieved through  the involvement of
               environmental enforcement officials.  These officials are well
               suited to identify any concerns related to their programs or
               areas of expertise and develop ways to address those
               concerns. j|L
               1Lois J. Schiffer, Assistant Attorney General, and James W. Rubin,
               Assistant Chief,  Policy, Legislation and Special Litigation Section,
               Environment and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of
               Justice,  jim. rubin @ usdoj.gov
                              PUBLICATIONS AND  STUDIES
Greening Industry: New Roles for Communities,
Markets and Governments
This World Bank Policy Research Report entitled, Greening
Industry, is a seminal work, documenting that significant
advances in environmental protection can be achieved in
developing countries without sacrificing economic growth.
To those  interested  in strengthening environmental
compliance and enforcement,  it also demonstrates the
benefits of new models which combine fundamental activities
such as government inspection, compliance monitoring and
legal enforcement mechanisms with steps that harness
market forces and enhance accountability for results though
public disclosure, advocating a new model with a triad of
government, community and market forces as a
way of approaching environmental management.
[NOTE: consistent  with  the  "Principles of
Environmental  Enforcement" international
framework  that calls for approaches that tap a
range of economic, legal, social, personal and
organizational motivators to achieve compliance.]
The World Bank's Development Economics Vice
Presidency prepared this research as a program
of collaboration  with developing  country
environmental  agencies for the  design,
implementation and evaluation of new approaches
to pollution control. Researchers worked closely
with officials in Brazil, China, Colombia, India, Indonesia,
Mexico, and the Philippines both in design and evaluation.
Practitioners who are not economists by training or inclination
can skip the otherwise very good explanations of economic
theory and  find in this report a certain pragmatism along
 -
fc.
    PROPER RATINGS:
% CHANGE AFTER 18 MONTHS
   20
   -20
   -40
  -100
          i
[A-Qood,        B t ^avisStandanJs,
:^ (? - Minimum Standards J) - fielpiy Standards
f" to K7^ r~ViB.ซซAtป '   "  ••;•-.-•*
 3-No Controls
with very useful hard evidence of how these approaches can
and do work.  Of  particular note are successful public
disclosure case studies on the Indonesia PROPER and
Philippines ECO-Watch programs which employ a 5-tier color
coded public reporting system on compliance status and
overall environmental performance, principally serving to
move the worst actors into compliance or out of the "black"
[NOTE: evidencing a similar impact to  "blacklisting"
approaches for the worst violators.] and successful uses of
pollution charges  both from penalties assessed through
traditional enforcement in Malaysia, or fee schemes that
charge for pollution discharges and more for levels in violation
of standards used  in China, to the more pure application of
economic taxes in Colombia's Antioquia  district of the
            Andean highlands which  was  able  to
            capitalize  on institutions better able  to
            implement tax collection. The ideal of a
            pollution charge system  which drives
            environmental performance through economic
            pressures is the darling of economists. What
            this report does is bridge this theory with the
            practice of enforcement. It is no surprise to
            most regulators and enforcers the world over
            that  "many plant managers opt for serious
            pollution control when they face steep, regular
            payments for emissions and that pollution
charges also generate public revenue which may be used to
support local pollution control efforts".
The Report was published for the World Bank by Oxford
University Press and is available on the internet through
books @worldbank.org. &
                 D  E
The INECE Newsletter

-------
These environmental compliance ratings are color-coded:
   Gold = Clean technology, waste minimization, pollution
   prevention.
   Green = Above standards and good maintenance,
   housekeeping.
   Blue = Efforts meet minimum standards/requirements.
   Red = Efforts do not meet minimum standards.
   Black = No pollution control effort; and serious environmental
   damage.
The top-ranked factories in Indonesia enjoy a high-profile award
ceremony but those with substandard performance are notified and
given six months to clean up. Within 18 months, studies of 187 pilot
plants showed that water pollution had dropped by 40 percent. The
biggest impact has been  achieved from those in the "black" category
moving up to red or blue. The Philippines' Eco-watch achieved a
dramatic increase in the environmental compliance of factories, with a
sharp increase in blue ratings from 8 percent to 58 percent by 1998.
In the 1990s, Columbia developed a pollution charge system in the. In
Columbia's pollution charge system, all polluters, towns, factories and
farms must pay for each  unit of organic pollution they discharge into
the waterways of Antioquia. During the program's first year, reported
organic discharges dropped dramatically by 18 percent, and along the
Rio Negro, factories reduced their organic discharges by 52 percent.
UNEP Handbook Explores Environment and Trade
'The need to ensure that trade and environment policies are
mutually supportive is more pressing today than ever before.
However, successful integration of these policies can only
be achieved through a constructive dialogue based on far
broader awareness and understanding of the complex
interlinkages between trade and our environment." So states
Klaus Toepfer, Executive Director of the  United  Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP),  in his preface to
"Environment and Trade: A Handbook," issued in May 2000.
The new UNEP report, a joint effort with the International
Institute for Sustainable Development (USD), was produced
in response to a growing wave of public interest in the
environmental implications of globalization following the
widespread protests at the World Trade Organization (WTO)
Conference in Seattle last November and the World Bank
and International Monetary Fund (IMF) meetings in
Washington in April 2000. The UNEP Handbook tries to
make the complex relationship between the environment
and international trade more understandable and accessible
to practitioners, policy makers, and NGOs as well as the
general public. The Handbook sees both great threats and
great opportunities in this  relationship for countries,  local
communities and firms pursuing economic development and
environmental protection.
The UNEP Handbook surveys international environmental
management, including multilateral environmental
agreements (MEAs); explains the basics of the WTO; covers
the physical and  economic linkages that bind trade and
sustainable development; examines the interactions between
trade law and environmental law,  both nationally and
internationally; and treats various institutional issues.
Additionally, the Handbook seeks to explain the complex
environmental aspects of regional trade agreements  such
as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the
European Union and Mercosur. The Handbook should help
many more people understand  how trade can affect the
environment, for better or  worse, and how environmental
concern should be integrated with trade policies to foster
sustainable development, in both rich and poor countries.
Printed copies of the UNEP Handbook can be obtained from
UNEP's online bookshop: http://www.earthprint.com, as well
as on line at http://www.unep.ch/etu and http://www.iisd.ca/
trade/handbook. JH
                                         INECE   NEWS
INECE partners are working to make the first decade of the new millenium the decade of implementation and enforcement of
environmental law. INECE is stepping up to increasing demand for assistance in strengthening environmental compliance
and enforcement programs.
INECE: Index of Conference Proceedings
Papers-Discussions-Studies
The Index is a recent publication including references to all
papers; workshop, plenary and meeting reports; welcome,
opening and closing remarks; and keynote speeches from
all ten volumes of proceedings from the  International
Conferences on Environmental Compliance and Enforcement
dates 1990 to 1998.1
Proceedings papers are referenced by topic, country, region
and organization, as well as by conference. The index also
contains additional references to and synopses of capacity
building documents, technical documents and other INECE
resources. The Index and documents listed in it are available
on the INECE Internet site: http://inece.org. They also are
available on request of the INECE Secretariat.
 1 (Utrecht, The Netherlands, May 8-10, 1990; Budapest, Hungary,
September 22-25, 1992; Oaxaca, Mexico, April 25-28, 1994; Chiang
Mai, Thailand, April 22-26,  1996; and Monterey, California,  USA,
November 16-20,1998). $

INECE Partners with the World Bank Institute for
Distance Learning Instruction
INECE will be partnering with the World Bank Institute to
bring training and capacity building to developing countries
through distance learning. This project, part of a major
effort launched by the World Bank's president in July, will
reduce cost and increase access to practitioner, technical
and legal expertise around the globe.^-
Adriana Bianchi, Distance Learning Coordinator, World Bank
abianchi@worldbank.org
                                               The International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement

-------
INECESpecialTopiclhteniet-basedFomins Inaugurated
Special topic forums are part of a broader effort to empower
individual initiative and increase real time access to collective
experience, implementation and training materials as well as
provide concerted effort and attention to the topics. Forums initially
cover five areas: hazardous waste  (including transboundary
movement- Basel Convention), transboundary movement of ozone
depleting substances (Montreal Protocol), transboundary trade in
endangered species (CITES), enforcement of pesticides
requirements, and public access to information and justice (Aarhus
Convention). Those forums, which involve national enforcement of
domestic laws  implementing international  environmental
agreements, will also benefit from collaboration with the relevant
UNEP Secretariats. At least two co-chairs from different regions
of the globe with the requisite experience and expertise in these
fields and support of their organizations are invited to design, identify
and  collect resources and manage  requests for support and
information sharing via the internet and other means as appropriate.
Administrative support is provided by the INECE Secretariat. As
with all activities of INECE, these activities are voluntary and build
upon related duties and job responsibilities of contributing
individuals and institutions. The work program and workload will
complement and fit within current goals and activities and will be
planned accordingly. This work is designed to magnify the potential
impact of our work and  provide greater opportunity for results.  For
selected topics, INECE workprograms include support for virtual
global resource centers for one-stop easy Internet access to a
range of contacts, information, implementation and training materials
needed by enforcement and compliance professionals to facilitate
job performance, lit
  FORUMS and INVITED CO-CHAIRS
  Hazardous Waste Transf rontier Shipments (Basel)
  EnforcementForum
  Michael Fenders, U.S. EPA, Chair G-8
  Roy Watkinson, Environment Agency of England and Wales
  Ozone Depleting Substances (Montreal Protocol)
  EnforcementForum
  Joost Cornet, The Netherlands, Inspectorate for the
  Environment, IMPEL Chair, CFC Enforcement Project
  Bruce Pasfield, USDOJ, Chair, CFC Task Force
  International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)
  EnforcementForum
  Ladislav Miko, Chair, European Workgroup, Interpol on CITES
  enforcement
  Tom RHey, United States Fish and Wildlife      ;
  Public Access to Environmental Information and
  Justice Enforcement Forum
  Helena Cfzkova, Czech Republic
  CarlBruch, ELI, NGO
  Representatives to Aarhus Implementation Group
  Pesticides Enforcement Forum
  Fred Campbell, Jamaica
  Durwood Zaelke, CIEL
  Marco Gonzalez Pastora, CCAD
  Marcia Mulkey, Office of Pesticides, U.S. EPA

  Training and Capacity Building
  Mlchele De Nevers, Manager, Environmental and Natural
  Resources, World Bank Institute
  Chris Currie, Officer, Enforcement Branch, Conservation &
  Protection, Fisheries Management, Dept of Fisheries and
  Oceans
  Cheryl Wasserman, Contact for National Enforcement
Draining Institute, USEPA	        • '   _
Charter and Terms of Reference for the INECE Partnership
The INECE Executive Planning Committee is finalizing a charter
with terms of reference for the informal international partnership in
order to achieve greater transparency, continuity and broader
ownership in regard to its mission, leadership, staffing and
operations.  Included are provisions for a third co-chair from a
developing country or transition economy for a two year term with
rotation among different regions of the globe. jฃ

Sixth International Conference: Soliciting Initial
Proceedings Papers and Anticipating Participation
The Sixth International Conference on Environmental Compliance
and Enforcement is targeted for November of 2001 (location still to
be determined.) Initial papers are solicited by December 15,2000
for the proceedings and should help identify potential speakers
and panelists.  Formats follow prior proceedings with a focus on
practical experience, program evolution, results and resources
required for success and lessons learned from success or problems
encountered. Proposed Conference themes:
 •   Global Push for Compliance with Multilateral Environmental
     Agreements.
 •   Harnessing Public Support and Market Forces for
     Compliance.
 •    Making Enforcement Credible, Efficient, Effective
     Advances in Technology and Approaches to
     Compliance Monitoring and Detection of Illegal
     Operations.
 •    Building Regional and Global Networks and
     Partnerships.
 •    Making it Happen: Applying the Principles;
     Balancing "Carrots and Sticks".

Conference participation will be about  230 invited
enforcement practitioners that will likely lead to an
allocation of about two or three persons from each of the
100 or so countries engaged with the INECE network.
Invitations will go out in the beginning of 2001.  Unlike
past conferences INECE will now be relying upon invited
participants to arrange their own travel and expenses.
World Bank country grant and loan funds, other donor
support, and support from the  related work programs of
regional and sub-regional enforcement networks can be
used for this purpose, fg-
The INECE Newsletter

-------
                              ENFORCEMENT  HIGHLIGHTS
Enforcement for Clean Air
Violator "blacklisting", economic incentives, fines and
public information campaigns. China
Progress in improving air quality in Beijing is a high priority.
China is blacklisting polluters, initiating motor vehicle
inspections and enforcement, making greater use of
economic incentives, and increasing use of public information
campaigns to achieve greater compliance with environmental
requirements to address air pollution. The  Beijing
Environmental Protection Bureau recently released a list of
the 30 worst polluters in Beijing, including a "black list" of
the top ten polluters, and imposed fines of between 10,000
and 80,000 RMB. The Beijing Municipality has also adopted
strict checks of pollution of new cars, cars already in use,
and kerosene-fueled vehicles.  During 1999, the exhaust
emissions of 340,000 vehicles were reported inspected with
110,000 cars rejected. China has already banned leaded
gasoline in 50 cities and is scheduled to ban it  nationwide
as of July 1, 2000.  Additionally, the Beijing Municipality is
promoting subway  and light rail transportation, changing
traffic patterns, and reducing traffic jams as measures to
reduce air pollution.
Thirty study teams  over the past five years examined the
enforcement of laws generally. Qu Geping, the  National
People's Congress' Natural Resources and Environment
Committee Chairman, emphasized that using the media to
expose violators and to praise enforcers of environmental
regulations was the main  tool to get local government
compliance  with  national environmental protection
regulations. Moreover, raising public consciousness about
environmental issues is part of a deliberate strategy to
encourage citizens to put pressure on local government to
enforce environmental regulations. All these steps will be
needed to implement new amendments adopted April 29,
2000, including "stiffer penalties, broader definitions of
pollution sources, expanded use of discharge fees and other
market-based incentives, stricter permitting and monitoring
requirements and total load targets."
Power plants modifications must meet requirements for
best available control technology, U.S.
Hundreds of thousands of tons of air pollutants contributing
to acid rain, smog and high levels of particulate concentration
in the U.S. should have been reduced through best available
controls on power plant modifications over the past several
years. By law, both new construction and major modifications
are subject to requirements for best available  control
technology through new source review permitting.
In November 1999, the USEPA through the U.S. Department
of Justice launched lawsuits against seven  electric
companies, charging that 17 of the companies' power plants
illegally released massive amounts of air pollutants for years,
contributing to some of the most severe environmental
problems in North America. The lawsuits assert that the
power utilities made substantial modifications to their plants,
 replacing large portions of their boilers, without installing
 the "best available technology," and coming in for revised
 permits as was required, to control, smog, acid rain and
 soot. In March 2000, the lawsuits were expanded to include
 12 additional plants bringing the total to 29 plants.  The
 federal-law suits were joined by eight states because they
 were adversely affected by the additional emissions from
 these plants.
 All but one of these plants are in settlement negotiations
 and  in February 2000 the first settlement was reached.
 Unprecedented in its scope, the company will pay $35 million
 in civil penalties and another $10 million on environmentally
 beneficial projects in its service region to mitigate the impact
 of emissions from its plants. Additionally, renovation of its
 aging power plants by switching one plant to natural gas
 and  making major changes at a second is estimated to
 cost $1 billion. As a result of the settlement, hundreds of
 thousands of tons of air pollution from this one company
 alone will be eliminated.
 Because routine inspections sometimes do not identify plant
 modifications, USEPA's Region 3 piloted an investigation
 approach for pulp and paper plants that incorporates up front
 facility capacity and permit reviews to identify facilities where
 plant modifications are likely to have occurred and then
 undertake more in-depth reviews.  Other regions are now
 adopting this practice. ฃ

EnforcementandProtectionofEndaiigered Species
 Canadian bird smugglers get record fines and jail terms.
 Canada
 In July, a Canadian court sentenced the head of a company
to three months in prison, and both  he and his son were
fined C$75,000 (US$50,676) after they pleaded guilty to
criminal charges of smuggling tropical finches across
international borders. This record fine was the largest fine
ever imposed under federal legislation for wildlife smuggling
in Canada and followed a 17-month investigation by
Environment Canada and the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service.  Canary size finches, highly sought after by pet
traders, breeders and collectors, are caught in the wilds of
Africa,  shipped through Europe into Canada, and often
exported to the United States.
From 1997 to 1999, the company imported 19 shipments of
exotic birds, containing an estimated 12,000 finches, of which
an estimated 5,000 were listed under the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). Of
these, nine shipments contained illegal birds, that is, CITES
listed birds not covered by an import permit. The individuals
were charged with illegally importing an estimated 756
tropical finches, 30 parakeets and 20 mynas at an estimated
value of C$19,000 (US$65,540). The family business was
also charged with illegally exporting 3,882  tropical
       (Enforcement Highlights - continued on page 10)
                                             The International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement

-------
                                                CONTACTS
    International
    Inter-governmental:

    iNECE
    See newsletter staff on next page for
    contact information
    UNEP
    Mrs. Jacqueline Alolsf de Larderel
    Phone:  331-44-371450
    Fax:     331-44-371474
    unepie@unep.fr
    Mr. Donald Kaniaru
    Phone:  254-2-623507
    Fax:     254-2-624249
    donald.kaniaru @ unep.org
    Dr. Iwona Rummel-Bulska
    Phone:  41-22-917-8448
    Fax:     41-22-917-8043
    iwona.rummel-bulska@unep.ch
    INTERPOL
    Mr. Torkjel Rygnestad
    Phone:  33-4-72-44-7636
    Fax:     33-4-72-44-7221
    irygnestad ฉ interpol.int
    World Customs Organziation (WCO)
    Mr. Ercan Saka
    Phone:  32-2-209-9333
    Fax:     32-2-209-9493
    ercan.saka@wcoomd.org
    Organziation for Economic
    Cooperation and Development (OECD)
    Ms. Joke Waller-Hunter
    Phone:  33-1-452-49300
    Fax:     33-1-452-47876
    joke.waller-hunter@oecd.org
    Mr. Krzysztof Michalak
    Phone:  33-1-452-49600
    Fax:     33-1-452-49671
    kr2ysztof.michalak@oecd.org
    Commonwealth Secretariat
    Mr. Kosi Latu
    Phone:  44-171-839-3411
    Fax:     44-171-839-9081
    k.Latu@commonwealth.int

    Non-Governmental:
    Center for International Environmental
    Law (CIEL)
    Mr. Durwood Zaelke
    Phone:  1-202-785-8700
    Fax:     1-202-785-8701
    cleldz@igc.apc.org
    Environmental Investigation Agency
    (EIA)
    Mr. Julian Newman
    Phone:  44-171-490-7040
    Fax:     44-171-490-0436
    juliannewman @ ela-international.org
    Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide
    (E-LAW)
    Mr. Bern Johnson
    Phone:  1-541-687-8454
    Fax:     1-541-687-0535
    elawus@elaw.org
Environmental Law Institute (ELI)
Mr. Bill Futrell
Mr. Carl Bruch
Phone:   1-202-939-3800
Fax:     1-202-939-3868
futrell@eli.org
bruch@eli.org

Foundation for International
Environmental Law and Development
(FIELD)
Mr. Philippe Sands
Phone:   441-71-637-7950
Fax:     441-71-637-7951
ps12@soas.ac.uk

The World Conservation Union (IUCN)
Mr. Charles Di Leva
Phone:   49-228-6392-231
Fax:     49-228-2692-250
CDiLeva@elc.iucn.org

World Bank
Ms. Michele de Nevers,  WB Institute
Phone:   1-202-473-8607
Fax:     1-202-614-0779
mdenevers@worldbank.org
Ms. Jean Aden, Asia
Phone:   1-202-458-2749
Fax:     1-202-522-1666
jaden@worldbank.org
Mr. Arne Dalfelt, Aftrica
Phone:   1-202-478-8195
Fax:     1-202-473-8085
adelfelt@worldbank.org
Mrs. M. Theresa Sena, Latin America
Phone:   1-202-473-5754
Fax:     1-202-522-3540
tserra@worldbank.org

World Wildlife Foundation
Mr. Bill Eichbaum
Phone:   1-202-778-9645
Fax:     1-202-293-9211
bill.eichbaum@wwfus.org

Africa/West Asia/
Middle  East  Networks

African Development Bank (ADB)
Mr. Eugene Shannon
Phone:   225-20-20-5558
Fax:     225-20-20-5033
e.shannon@afdb.org

African Network on Environmental Law
NESDA Secretariat
Phone:   225-20-20-54-18/9
Fax:     225-20-20-59-22
nesda@nesda.org

UNEP - African Regional Network
Mr. Charles Okidi
Phone:  ' 254-2-623-815
Fax:    254-2-623-859
charles.okidi@unep.org

CEDARE
Dr. Kamal Sabet
Phone:   1-202-570-1859
Fax:    1-202-570-2481
cedare @ ritsecq.com.eg
West Africa
Dr. Peter Acquah
Phone:   233-21-664-97
Fax:     233-21-662-690
Or. George Asiamah
Phone:   233-21-660-716/7
Fax:     233-21-660718
gdoasiamah@yahoo.co.uk
Central Africa/CEPREDESCI
Mr. Pierre Mbouegnqng
Phone:   237-23-9229      ,
Fax:     237-23-9229
mbouegnong@yaho6.fr
East Africa
Mr. Robert  Wabunoha
Phone:   256-41-25-1064
Fax:     256-41-25-7521
aramany @ starcom.co.ug
South Africa
Mr. Jerry Lengoasa
Phone:   27-12-310-3911       >
Fax:     27-12-322-2682
jlengoasa @ ozone.pwv.gov.za


Asia  and  Pacific
Networks

ASPA-INECE/UNEP
Mr. Lai Kurukulasuriya
Phone:   66-2-288-1877
Fax:     66-2-280-3829
kurukulasuriya@un.org

South Asian Cooperative
Environmental Program (SACEP)
Mr. Ananda Raj Joshi
Phone:   94-1-589-376
Fax:     94-1-589-369   :
a}_sacep@eureka.lk
Mr. Prasantha DiasAbeyequnawardene
Phone:   94-1-596442
Fax:     94-1-589369
pd_sacep @ eureka.lk
Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN)
Dr. Aziz A. Rasol
Phone:   60-3-294-7816
Fax:     60-3-293-1646
aziz_rasol@jas.sains.rtiy
North East Asian Region
Environmental program (NEARER)
Dr. Hongjun Zhang
Phone:   1-617-740-7043
Fax:     1-617-740-7043  : -•  :'•'•     J
zhj0611@yahoo.com
South Pacific Regional  Environmental
Program (SPREP)
Mr. Tumarii Peire Tutangata
Phone:   685-21-929
Fax:     685-20-231.',    ; ' ..;
Environmental Law Group of Asia
Mr. Antonio Oposa, Jr.
Phone:   632-809-6122/3176
Fax:     632-809-6122     -,.,. :_.':"., T
aoposalaw@oposa.c6rh
The INECE Newsletter
                                                                  8

-------
 Asia-Pacific Center for Environmental
 Law (APCEL)
 Afe. Irene Lin Heng Lye
 Phone:   65-874-3583
 Fax:     65-779-0979
 lawlyelh @ nus.edu.sg

 US-Asia  Environmental Partnership
 Mr. Peter Kimm
 Phone:   1-202-712-4156
 Fax:     1-202-216-3379
 pekimm@usaid.gov


 Americas  Networks

 FIDA/Organization of American States
 Dr. Richard Meganck
 Phone:   1-202-458-6248
 Fax:   .  1-202-458-3560
 rmeganck@oas.org
 Mr. Eric Dannenmaier
 Phone:   1-202-986-4264
 Fax:     1-202-986-7250
 elp@igc.org

 CEC/North American Working Group
 on Environmental Enforcement and
 Compliance Cooperation
 Ms. Darlene Pearson
 Phone:   1-514-350-4334
 Fax:     1-514-350-4314
 dpearson@ccemtl.org

 North American Wildlife  and
 Enforcement Group (NAWEGj
 Mr. Victor Ramirez
 Phone:   525-665-0757/8
 Fax:     525-660-9482
 vramirez@correo.profepa.gob.mx

 Central American  Commission of
 Sustainable Development (CCAD)
 Mr. Marco A. Gonzalez Pastora
 Phone:  503-278-5082
 Fax:     503-289-6127
 prolegis@sicanet.org.sv
 CARIB-INECE
 Mr. Tim Kasten (UNEP)
 Phone:  1-876-922-9267
 Fax:     1-876-922-9292
 tjk. uneprcuja @ cwjamaica.com
 Mr. Vincent Sweeney (CEHI)
 Phone:  1-758-452-2501
 Fax:     1-758-453-2721
 cehi@candw.lc
 Mr. Fred Campbell
 Phone:  1-876-754-7567
 Fax:     1-876-754-7596
 nrcaฎ infochan.com

 Fundacion Future  Latinoamericano
 Afe. Yolanda Kakabadse
 Phone:  593-2-463-503
 Fax:     593-2-463-503
fflaฎ interactive.net.ee
 ANDEAN-INECE
 Ms. Trinidad Ordonez
 Phone:  1-593-254-0920
 Fax:    1-593-256-5809
 santa.trinidad @ codetel.net.do

 MERCUSOL
 Mr. Antonio Benjamin     •
 Phone:  56-11-310-44004
 Fax:    56-11-310-44975   '.:'.
 p|anet-ben @ uol.com.br

 Europe Regional
 Networks

 Network for Implementation and
 Enforcement of Environmental Law
 (IMPEL)
 Mr. Terence Shears
 Phone:  322-299-4383
 Fax:    322-299-1070
 terence.shears@cec.eu.int

 AC-IMPEL (Accession Countries)
 Mr. Nassos Balodimos
 Phone:  322-296-9127
 Fax:    322-299-4123
 athanassios.balodimos@dg11.cec.be
 Mr. Ladislav Miko
 Phone:  420-2-683-4662
 Fax:    420-2-683-6190
 miko@cizp.cz

 Newly Independent States
 Environmental Compliance and
 Enforcement Network (NIS-ECEN)
 Mr. Krzysztof Michalak      :
 Phone:  331-45-24-9600
 Fax:    331-45-24-9671
 krzysztof.michaiak@oecd.org
 Mr. Arcadie Capcelea
 Phone:  373-2-22-6870            ;
 Fax:     373-2-22-0748
 relint@moldova.md ;         •',..,..
 Mediterranean Action Plan UNEP/
 WHO
 Dr. George Kamizoulis
 Phone:  30-1-7273105
 Fax:     30-1-725-3196/7
 whomed@hol.gr
 Mr. Lucien  Chabason
 Phone:  30-1-7273100
 Fax:     30-7253196/7
 unepmedu@unepmap.gr

 Regional Environment Center for
 Central & Eastern Europe
 Mr. Stephen Stec
 Phone:  36-26-311-199
 Fax:     36-26-311-294
sstec@rec.org

Ecopravo - Lviv
Ms. Svitlana Kravchenko
Phone:  380-0322-72-27-46
Fax:     380-0322-97-14-46
epac@icmp.lviv.ua
      The  INECE Executive    ^
   Planning Committee acting
         as the Newsletter
        EDITORIAL BOARD

           Dr. P. Acquah, Ghana
      Mrs. J. Aloisi de Larderel, UNEP
          Mtro. A. Azuela, Mexico
           Mr. A. Benjamin, Brazil
    Mr. T. Bie, People's Republic of China
         Mr. F. Campbell, Jamaica
         Mr. A. Capcelea, Moldova
      Ms. H. Cizkova, Czech Republic
         Ms. M. Comino, Australia
           Mr. C. Currie, Canada
             Mr. W. Futrelf, ELI
    Mr. M. Gonzalez Pastora, El Salvador
          Mr. S. Herman, USEPA
         Mr. M. Hietamaki, Finland
           Mr. D. Kaniaru, UNEP
            Mr. G. Kremiis, EC
      Dr. P. Leinster, United Kingdom
       Mr. J. Lengoasa, South Africa
      Ms. M. de Nevers, World Bank
      Mr. S. Pairoj-Boriboon,Thailand
         Dr. A. A.Rasol, Malaysia
 Mr. M. Rodriguez Becerra, Colombia (TBC)
        Dr. I. Rummel-Bulska, UNEP
           Dr. B. Sengupta, India
    Mr.  E. Shannon, African Devel. Bank
         Dr. N. Tawfiq, Saudi Arabia
         Dr. R. Wabunoha, Uganda
        Ms. J. Waller-Hunter, OECD
      Mr. G. Wolters, The Netherlands
           Mr. D. Zaelke, CIEL
   -  '-.     •"• '•   '         •  .  :       . >
         INECE Secretariat
       NEWSLETTER STAFF
           MS. CHERYL WASSERMAN
        Associate Director for Policy Analysis
    Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
      1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW MC 2251-A
           Washington, DC 20460, USA
    Tel: 1-202-564-7129  Fax: 1-202-564-0070
           wasserman.cheryl@epa.gov
              MR.JOGERARDU
    Head, Strategy, Planning and Control Division
  Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environ.
           P.O. Box 30945,2500 GX
           The Hague, The Netherlands
    Tel:  31-70-339-2536 Fax:  31-70-339-1300
       Jo.Gerardu@IMH-HI.DGM.minvrom.nl
             Special Thanks to:
   MS. DOROTHY SANTOS and MS. SHARIOLEY
    ESA, inc. for newsletter design and publication
MS. PAT KAISER and IDIT REITER for article research
                                                The International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement

-------
      (Enforcement Highlights - continued from page 7)
finches valued at an estimated C$97,000 (US$65,540) into
the United States.  A U.S. court sentenced the wife and
mother to six months in prison and a fine of US$75,000.
Following her release, she will face similar charges in
Canadian courts.
Ivory smugglers arrested. Portugal
A severe blow to international ivory-smuggling was dealt last
October with the arrest of a South African and three
Portuguese citizens on charges of smuggling elephant ivory
from South Africa to Portugal. Under CITES, South African
elephants and their tusks have been banned  from
international trade since 1990. The high demand for ivory
has led to the depletion of elephant populations from two
million in 1970 to an estimated 543,000 in Africa today. The
ivory smugglers were arrested in October during a joint South
African  and Portuguese operation, following months of
investigation by the endangered species protection unit of
the South African Police and INTERPOL.
Record jail sentences for caviar smugglers. U.S.
In the Caspian Sea, wild sturgeon populations, a species of
prehistoric origin,  have fallen 70 percent over the last 20
years prompting new protection under CITES.  Effective April
1,1998 permits are required from the country of origin or re-
export to certify that the fish were taken legally and that
trade represents no threat to their survival in the wild. In the
U.S., caviar shipments of eight ounces or more must be
declared and made available for inspection.
The first criminal case in the U.S. brought convictions against
two persons in November 1999 after examination of their
sales records revealed that the company sold 21,000 pounds
of caviar between April and November 1998, while mandated
import/export declarations showed importation during that
period of only 88 pounds.
A second  major  case was brought after  an inspector
observed suspect caviar labels on imports. Subsequent DNA
analysis of the caviar by the National Fish and Wildlife
Forensics Laboratory found inconsistencies with the import
declarations. The president and sales manager of one of
the largest caviar importers in the United States and the
president of the trading company have pled guilty to various
felony counts, including conspiracy, smuggling and making
false statements, submitting false wildlife records, mail fraud,
and exports in violation of the U.S. Endangered Species
Act.  If plea agreements are accepted by the Court,
defendants will serve prison sentences of 41, 21 and 15
months respectively and the importer has agreed to pay  a
$10.4 million criminal fine, the largest  ever in wildlife
prosecution.
London traders plead guilty in shahtoosh smuggling.
 United Kingdom
Tibetan antelopes orchiru are an endangered species, which
are killed for their soft underbelly fur to make expensive
Shahtoosh  shawls. These premium shawls, sometimes
measuring more than six meters (19.5 feet) in length, are
valued for their softness and sell for as much as 6,500 pounds
(US$10,320) each. In April, a London Trading Company,
was fined  1,500 pounds (US$2,381) for trading in illegal
shahtoosh shawls in violation of CITES as well as national
laws in Britain and India (except for the states of Jammu
and Kashmir). The London Metropolitan Police seized 138
shawls, using DNA testing to identify the chiru wool! The
shawls were valued at about 353,000 pounds (US$560,495).
An estimated 1,000 Tibetan antelopes were killed to weave
these 138 shawls, a number which represents two percent
of the world population The case is indicative of the growing
commitment of local authorities not to allow illegal wildlife
trade within their jurisdiction.j$.

Enforcement and Agricultural Chemicals
Bangkok police raid factories selling prohibited
chemicals. Thailand
In February, Bangkok police raided a biochemical Company
plant in Bang Pu industrial estate and seized illegal chemicals
worth billions of baht. Deputy Agriculture Minister Newin
Chidbhob stated that the plant used ten extremely hazardous
chemicals banned by the Agriculture Department. Of the
250 agro-chemical products manufactured at the site, only
eight products were under permit. The company will be
charged in both criminal and civil suits with manufacturing
prohibited, hazardous chemicals,  producing substandard
goods, and selling products without permits. Mr. Newin also
announced that legal action will be taken against the
company's customers and distributors who allegedly were
aware of the illegal activity.
Businessman gets 17 years in prison for endangering
employees. U.S.
In April 2000 the owner of an Idaho fertilizer manufacturer
was ordered to serve a record-breaking 17 years in prison
for environmental crimes and to pay $5.9 million in restitution
to his employee who suffered permanent brain damage from
hydrogen cyanide poisoning.  The owner was convicted of
knowingly endangering the health and safety of  his
employees, three counts of illegally disposing of hazardous
cyanide waste and making a false statement.
Over a two-day period, the owner directed this employee
and other employees, clothed only in jeans and t-shirts, to
enter a chemical  storage tank and clean out the cyanide
waste without the required protective clothing and breathing
gear. After the first day, when employees complained of
sore  throats and asked him to test  the air and provide
protective gear, the owner ignored their requests and sent
them back into the storage tanks.  When the employee
collapsed inside the tank, his rescue was delayed for nearly
an  hour because the required rescue equipment was not
immediately available. The criminal case was the result of a
22-month investigation by EPA's Criminal Investigation
Division, Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
the Fed. Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Justice
and Internal Revenue Service, the Department of the Treasury,
as  well as several Idaho state agencies, jg.
 The INECE Newsletter
                                                                                                    10

-------
Enforcement, Hazardous Waste and Water quality
(International Cooperation - Continued from page 1)
waste at an estimated cost of over $8,000.
In 1997, the Mexican belt manufacturer shipped flammable
hazardous waste from its facility to two U.S. facilities that are
not authorized to received hazardous waste, and failed to
appropriately package, label and complete manifests for the
hazardous waste. The Arizona firms were cited $1 5,525 and
$25,344 respectively for storing hazardous waste without a
permit and improperly managing hazardous waste containers.
Strong message sent to repeat violators of hazardous
waste requirements - Stopping use of storm water sewers
as hazardous waste dumps
It takes a lot for some people to get the message! In the
longest sentence ever,  in  August, 1999 the owner of  a 55
gallon drum reconditioning company was sentenced to 13
years in prison for repeatedly ordering his employees to dump
hazardous wastes including pesticides, heavy metals and
toxic solvents into a storm sewer that empties into McKay
Bay near Tampa, Florida as well as onto land near his facility.
An estimated four million gallons of contaminated wastewater
and more than 600,000 pounds of solid waste were dumped
over an eight-year period. He continued these practices even
as he was awaiting sentencing for similar actions at another
facility that had brought him under increased scrutiny.
Airlines may be small hazardous waste handlers but
can still pose great health threat
In December, 1 999, a major US airline company was caught
carrying illegal quantities of hazardous waste in an unapproved
manner, when one of the drums being shipped from Mexico
City to Miami opened and caught fire.  There will be an $8
million fine as well as court supervised program at every airport
served by the airline where it accepts cargo for shipment, a
severe punishment given the potential for endangering the
lives of passengers and handlers of cargo, ฃ
Enforcement and Safe Drinking Water
Class action suit over deaths from contaminated drinking
water. Canada
The people of Walkerton, in Ontario, Canada have launched a
class action lawsuit and the Ontario Ministry of Environment
is investigating how drinking water, contaminated with E. coli
bacteria, was distributed to the community of Walkerton
causing an unprecedented environmental contamination
incident where six people were killed and at least 600 were
reported ill. As a result of the contamination, 5,000 residents
must boil their water for at least 6 months, over 1 ,000 went to
area hospitals with severe symptoms and several infants were
placed on kidney dialysis suffering total kidney failure. Water
contamination with E. cpli bacteria found in fecal matter was
distributed by the Walkerton water supply utility over the course
of a week despite required testing and apparently either went
unreported to authorities in Ontario as was required by law
and/or was not effectively followed up by these authorities.
            Investigations are underway to sort out responsibility. Citizen
            activists attribute part of the failure to reduced levels of funding
            and staffing at the Ministry of Environment including the
            privatization of testing labs for drinking water quality as well
            as budget cutting efforts and reduced emphasis  on
            enforcement and deterrence which they believe contributed
            to laxity in controls on factory farms as well as public utilities.
            While the contamination may have resulted in the first instance
            from recent flooding caused by heavy rain, the chlorinating
            unit on one of the two main wells  pumping water also
            reportedly had not been working properly. Who is to be held
            responsible is to be determined by these many legal actions
            but it does highlight the importance of sound monitoring, timely
            notification to appropriate health and environmental authorities
            and effective preventive action where drinking water supplies
            are affected. It also points out important linkages of efforts to
            secure safe drinking water with controls on unrelated activities
            such as factory farm operations as are involved here and proper
            disposal of contaminated chalk or lime as was reported in
            INECE Newsletter #2 (San Paulo, Brazil). ฃ

            Enforcement and Oil Spills
            Oil company fined $40 million for 1970 oil spill. Nigeria
            Nine years after the lawsuit was filed, a Nigerian Court has
            ordered a Major International Oil Company to pay the equivalent
            of US$40 million in compensation for the 1970 oil spill in
            Ogoniland.  Its Nigerian subsidiary, will appeal the decision,
            claiming that the company had already left the Niger Delta
            region when the spill occurred, because of the 1967-1970
            Nigerian/Biafran civil war.
            However, Dr. Owens Wiwa, a Toronto physician and brother
            to slain Ogoni environmental activist Ken Saro-Wiwa, stated
            that the civil war was over by the  time the Ebibu spill in
            Ogoniland occurred. Dr. Wiwa reported that in Ebibu the oil
            is five meters deep and has never been cleaned up; hard
            cakes of crude oil continue to seep into underground water,
            and streams remain polluted. Further, Dr. Wiwa claims that
            Ebibu is just one of over 300 sites of spillage in Ogoniland
            alone.  Dr. Wiwa alleges that for 30 years the company has
            refused to do an adequate cleanup  or  pay adequate
            compensation to villagers who have been drinking from polluted
            streams and wells. |g.

            Enforcement and Ecosystem Protection
            Landmark citizen suit filed to clean up Manila Bay is
            proceeding, Philippines
            As reported in our last issue of this newsletter, dated
            September 1999, in a landmark class action law suit,
            concerned Residents of Manila Bay filed suit in the Fourth
            Judicial Region against the Philippines Government, polluting
            corporations and citizens who discharged their wastes into
            the waterways of Manila Bay. The suit seeks to hold them
            jointly liable for the pollution of Manila Bay and jointly
            responsible for  its cleanup. The first legal hurdle was
            surmounted when the court scheduled, just recently, a pretrial
            hearing to be held on July 25,2000. $
        11
The International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement

-------
                                REGIONAL  NETWORK  NEWS
                                     EUROPEAN  REGION
                     IMPEL
There have been two IMPEL meetings over the past twelve
months. The first, in Helsinki (Finland) in December 1999,
saw the adoption of the report on the seminar held in Lyon
on "Lessons Learned from Accidents." The meeting agreed
that several projects should go ahead including a major
conference on Environmental Compliance and Enforcement
to be held in Austria on 11 -13 October.
The second meeting was in Oporto (Portugal) in May. At
that meeting IMPEL reports on Complaint Procedures and
Access to Justice and a Fact Sheet for Printers were
adopted. In order to improve the accessibility of this latter
report  to the printing industry, it was agreed that the
possibility of putting a summary of this report in different
languages on the internet should be considered.
Minimum criteria for Inspectors and Inspectorates
A  common  position  supporting  the  proposed
recommendation on Minimum Criteria for Environmental
Inspections as a voluntary guideline was reached in March.
The Environment Committee of the European Parliament
though remains committed to the idea of a Directive.
The meeting agreed too that the projects concerned with
the peer review of inspectorates and inspection procedures,
as well as training and qualifications of inspectors, following
on from the legislative proposal on minimum criteria for
environmental inspections would go ahead no matter what
the outcome of that proposal.
Inspector Exchange
The Greek Exchange Programme, the last in the series of
"traditional" exchange programmes, took place in November
1999.  This meant that  each of the member states had
hosted an exchange programme which provided invaluable
information on inspection practices in each of the member
states while giving those taking part an excellent opportunity
to build informal networks. The project on environmental
enforcement practices (PEEP) and the comparison
programmes  are the  successors to the exchange
programmes.  PEEP is  designed to provide an in-depth
analysis of the inspection and enforcement procedures
applied by inspectors in different EU countries whereas the
comparison programme makes direct comparisons on how
the same processes are regulated in different countries. A
UK PEEP project will take place on 18-29 September.
The Finnish Comparison  Project for Inspectors will be on 29
August to 1 September and the Dutch Comparison Project
Is on 26-27 October. There is to be a meeting of Cluster 1
(Training and Exchange) 29 September.  The next IMPEL
Meeting is due  to be held in Paris on 6-8 December.
IMPEL website launched
IMPEL now has the benefit of a website on which various
details about the organization, including the reports it has
produced, can  be found. The address of the website is
httptf/europa.eu.int/comm/environment/impel.
               AC-MPELNetwork
IMPEL's sister organization for the candidate accession
countries to the European Union, AC IMPEL, held its Plenary
Meeting in Ljubljana on 8 May followed by an Exchange
Visit in Slovenia. The work of IMPEL is highly appreciated
by the candidate countries and we shall be exploring ways
in which the two networks can work more closely together.

                    CLEEN
On the  25-26 May 2000 the first conference of CLEEN
(Chemical Legislation European Enforcement Network) was
held in Athens, Greece. The main goal of this network is to
co-ordinate and improve enforcement of EU chemicals
legislation. Representatives of inspectorates, customs
authorities and policy departments of all Member States
including Norway and representatives of the European
Commission and the US EPA were present in Greece.
Two important conclusions of the CLEEN Conference were
that CLEEN should take up  the role of stakeholder to
influence the political and technical  processes within the
European Commission in order to improve the quality and
enforceability of EU substance legislation. Furthermore,
CLEEN should invite the Accession Countries to the EU, to
prepare them for future implementation and compliance with
EU substance legislation.
The first two tangible projects that  are organized in the
framework of CLEEN are EuroCad (on the Cadmium Directive
91/338/EC) and EurOzone (on the new Ozone Depleting
Substances Regulation replacing Regulation EC 3093/94).
With these enforcement activities prior gained experience
with the enforcement of EU New and Existing Substances
Regulation is maintained and extended.
The second CLEEN conference is scheduled for September
2001 in Vienna, Austria.
Information about the strategy and the activities of CLEEN
can be obtained at the Ministry of Environment, The Hague,
The Netherlands, Mr. Marc Proost, tel. +31-70-3391225(or
email: marc.proost@imh-hi.dgm.minvrom.nl).


NK Environmental Compliance and Enforcement
Network
On 23-24th  September 1999, in Chisinau,  Republic of
Moldova, more than 80 officials and experts met to discuss
environmental compliance and enforcement in the New
Independent States (NIS).  The participants  represented
countries from the region, inclusively Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova,
the Russian Federation, Ukraine and Uzbekistan, Czech
Republic, Germany,  Latvia, The Netherlands, Poland,
Romania, Sweden, the United Kingdom.  International
organizations  were represented by the  European
The INECE Newsletter
                                         12

-------
(NIS - continued)
Commission, the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, the World Bank, as well as by UNDP office in
Moldova and Tacis Programme.  Moldovan Environmental
Citizens' Organisations (ECOs)  also took part in the
discussion.
Proceeding from their own work experience and initial findings
of the Survey "Environmental Compliance and Enforcement
in the New Independent States: Current Practices and Ways
Forward", meeting participants reviewed the problems and
opportunities in ensuring compliance and enforcement of
environmental laws and regulations in the NIS. Key issues
raised by the inspectors included:
•   insufficient political support for enforcement efforts.
•   Ineffective enforcement tools and insufficient
     compliance efforts.
•   Lack of clarity and overlapping responsibilities within
     environmental enforcement structures.
•   Failure to prioritize enforcement activities.
•   Unrealistic environmental policies due to insufficient
     feedback from inspectors.
•   Gaps in stakeholder participation and public
     disclosure.
Lead by the willingness to face challenges of the transition
period, the participants decided to set up, within the
framework of the Environmental Action Programme (EAP)
Task Force, a network on environmental compliance and
enforcement in the NIS. It was suggested that the Network
should mainly comprise environmental inspectors from the
NIS enforcement agencies. At the same time, officials from
environmental authorities in the NIS, the ECO's and experts
from GEE and OECD countries would be invited to contribute
to the network.
Representatives from Armenia, Moldova, Ukraine and
Uzbekistan volunteered fora Steering Group of the Network.
This small steering group has supported the development of
the Terms of Reference for the Network. The Government of
Moldova played a convening role in Network establishment
both at the national and international level. The steering
group is also considering further work on the idea put forward
and discussed in Chisinau of developing a policy statement/
             declaration on enforcement and compliance which could be
             presented for the attention of Environment Ministers at their
             conference in Kiev in 2002.
             The main functions of the Network would be:
             •   To promote regional networking, exchange of
                 information and experience among the NIS and
                 between the NIS and OECD/CEE countries.
             •   To assist in development and implementation of
                 region- and country-specific capacity building and
                 technical assistance projects focusing on
                 strengthening the activities of the environmental
                 inspectorates and strengthening existing, and
                 developing new, tools for enforcement and
                 compliance in the NIS.
             The proposed network is expected  to build upon the
             experience  accumulated  by other global and European
             enforcement and compliance networks, such as the
             International Network for Environmental Compliance and
             Enforcement (INECE) and the network of the inspectors from
             the accession countries (AC IMPEL).  In evaluating the
             meeting, participants expressed a strong commitment to
             the future activities of the Network.
             The Chisinau meeting report and draft Terms of Reference
             were presented at the EAP Task Force meeting on 18-19th
             October 1999, in Szentendre, Hungary, and described the
             next steps.  It was envisaged that the secretariat of the
             Network would be located at the OECD in Paris and with a
             liaison officer in one of the NIS.  Efforts will  be  made to
             transfer the secretariat functions to the NIS in the long-term
             perspective.
             The representatives of donors expressed their interest in
             supporting the activities  of the Network, including the
             Netherlands willingness to support the secretariat at OECD
             and the European Commission to support Network activities.
             The World Bank considers the development of technical
             assistance programmes for environmental inspectorate in
             two of the NIS. The Network work program will be the basis
             for future funding proposals to donors.
             The report from the meeting and the survey are available
             from the EAP Task Force Secretariat at OECD. JH
                                      AMERICAS
North American Working Group on Environmental
Enforcement and Compliance Cooperation (EWG)
The Working Group (comprised of enforcement officials from
Canada, Mexico and the United States) was set up in 1995
under the North American Commission for Environmnetal
Cooperation (CEC) to discuss cooperation in enforcement
and compliance activities and to advise on the work program
of the CEC. Activities over the 1999-2000 period include 1)
issuing a guidance document on use of environmnetal
management systems (EMS) to  improve environmental
performace and compliance, 2) sponsoring an international
            REGION

             workshp on wildife forensics, 3) reporting on a pilot project
             to develop indicators of effective enforcement relating to
             hazardous waste requirements in the three countries; 4)
             producing an annual report  on how the three parties
             respectively fulfilled their obligations to effectively enforce
             domestic environmental requirelments. Upcoming activities
             include issuing a Special Enforcement Report in November
             2000 that will cover the topics of investigations, compliance
             promotion and measurement of results in the three countries,
             and a training workshop on CFC smuggling to be held in
             Spring 2001.
        13
The International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement

-------
North American WildlifeEnforcement Group
The North American Wildlife Enforcement Group has, over
the past year, concentrated on capacity building in the area
of wildlife forensics. In October 1999, the CEC, in conjunction
with the  North American Wildlife Enforcement Group,
sponsored a seminar on wildlife forensics for North American
scientists and enforcement officers. Following this seminar,
the CEC printed two trilingual information bulletins on forensic
investigative techniques, including DNA analysis, for
distribution to enforcement officers and inspectors throughout
North America. These bulletins are available on the on the
CEC web  site at: www.cec.org/programs_Projects/
law_policy/regional_enforcement_forum/naweg/
index.cmf?varlan=english. The CEC has also published a
Directory of North American Forensic Laboratories, soom
to be available at the same web site. Activities such as
these have encouraged the formation of a network of wildlife
forensic experts in North America - resulting in initial
agreement to standardize procedures for DNA data bases
on wildlife species.  Upcoming activities include a conference
scheduled for August 21-25,2000 in Monterey, Mexico on
the domestic and foreign trade in wildlife trophies for wildlife
enforcement officers from Canada, Mexico and the United
States.  Eighteen officers from each of the countries will
attend. The heads of wildlife enforcement programs will have
a meeting of the North American Wildlife Enforcement Group
during the week.
Caribbean Regional Environmental Crimes Workshop
The Commonwealth Secretariat and the Government of St.
Kitts and Nevis organized a training for 16 commonwealth
countries in the Caribbean at St. Kitts, February 28-March
3,2000 on the use of and enforcement of the criminal law in
the prevention of environmental crime.   Environmental
enforcement experts from the Ministry in the United Kingdom
and from U.S. EPA were also in attendance.  The training
objectives included consideration of the relationship between
Multilateral  Environmental Agreements (MEAs) and
environmental crime, examine  the use of and effective
enforcement of the criminal  law as an alternative to the
prevention of environmental crime, review best practices,
problems and potential  solutions in the prevention  of
environmental crime and fostering cooperation between
nationa, regional and international enforcement agencies in
the effective prevention of environmental crime.  It was geared
principally to criminal enforcement attorneys included an
introduction  to various conventions and schemes for
international, regional and national cooperation, mock trials,
models for cooperation, gi
                            AFRICA/MIDDLE EAST REGION
Lusaka Task Force: Cooperative Enforcement to
bciiefitfronilrainuigandDonated Equipment
The Lusaka Task Force, which include officers from Kenya,
Lesotho, Tanzania, Uganda, Republic of Congo, Republic of
Zambia, Ethiopia, Swaziland and  south Africa, was
established in 1997 to carry out the provisions of the Lusaka
Agreement on Cooperative Enforcement Operations Director
at Illegal Trade in Wild Fauna and Flora. That agreement,
negotiated in Lusaka, Republic of Zambia, with support from
the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in 1994
went into effect in December 1996. Officers with enforcement
authority in each participating nation, were appointed by
May 1999 and by December of 1999 the group had already
conducted three successful cross-border operations that
intercepted hundreds of tons of ivory tusks and firearms. A
three week training program is scheduled in Nairobi, Kenya
at the Task Force headquarters this July.  It is the first
specialized training arranged for the group to prepare the
officers to serve as the vanguard for Task Force operations
in participating countries.  The Task Force is unique in the
world and has now another precedent. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service has partnered with a worldwide charitable
organization that promotes wildlife  conservation and
education, the Safari Club International (SCI), along with a
major U.S. outdoor retailer, Cabela's, in a new public-private
partnership to meet some of the basic equipment needs for
Task Force officers as they work to protect elephants, rhinos
and other animals from poaching and illegal trade. The
equipment includes radios, GPS units, compasses, knives,
backpacks, canteens, boots, belts, hats  and clothing to
equip 32 African officers attending the training. In addition,
Fish and Wildlife service staff will participate in the training.
East Africa: Uganda to facilitate Enforcement network
around Lake Victoria
Officials from Uganda, including the head of the inspectorate
Division and environmental attorney, completed a three week
study tour in the U.S. under the auspices of the World Bank
as part of  a major  effort to strengthen environmental
compliance and enforcement. Uganda is working with other
countries sharing the resource around Lake Victoria, the
world's second largest lake providing a source of drinking
water for three countries:  Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania.
Recent reports indicate the lake is increasingly threatened
by contamination.
Central and West Africa
January 18-21,1999 in Accra, Ghana countries of the West
Coast and Central Africa adopted a guide forthe development
of standards for control of industrial effluents according to
the Convention of Abidjan relating to regional cooperation in
the  protection of the coastal zones and protocols against
pollution. The guide was developed by a group of scientific
and legal experts. They first evaluated common standards
in the countries of the Gulf of Guinea. It was noted that
Nigeria, Ghana and the Ivory Coast had standards in place
but  were at the beginning of gaining compliance but that
The INECE Newsletter
                                         14

-------
Benin, Togo, and Cameroon were really at the embryonic
stage. They amended a summary chart of standards and
recommendations made by a consulting expert of the ONUDI
using data initially submitted by the national experts
participating in the meeting. They then adopted a project to
develop regional standards to be proposed to the
Governments of the countries of the Gulf of Guinea to be
matched by 1) institutionalization of measures to encourage
compliance in reducing industrial pollution, 2) collaboration
between NGOs, Public authorities and  the public for
increasing awareness of the impacts of industrial pollution
on human health and environment,  3) promotion of clean
technologies, development of a regional convention and
installation of a committee to reinforce mechanisms to
control industrial pollution, 4) introduction of systems of
             pricing for resources as a function of direct cost and damage
             as well as an ecolabel program to encourage products which
             protect the environment.  Some of the difficulties noted at
             the meeting included difficulty of locating/mapping industrial
             pollution sources, lack of coordinated clean up structures,
             conflicts in competencies of authorities, lack of town planning
             controls. Recommendations included measures to maintain
             local databanks to located industrial sites starting with letters
             requesting submission of information by industrial operations
             to governments, impose requirements to control effluents,
             require environmental impact assessments for new and
             audits for existing facilities, develop town planning to
             concentrate industry and better manage waste, and integrate
             national policies for clean technology.  (Prepared by Pierre
             Mbouegnong, CEPREDESCI)
                              ASIA  AND  PACIFIC  REGION
ASPA-INECE
The Asia Region is moving ahead with programs for regional
cooperation in strengthening environmental compliance and
enforcement, initially focused in South Asia and Southeast
Asia. INECE partners, UNEP and the World Bank with
support from USEPA and the US Asia Environmental
Partnership, NORAD, The Netherlands among others are
working with leaders in the region to organize cost-effective
delivery of training and institution building awareness
programs through distance learning and regional train the
trainer programs for inspectors. Two recent examples are
noted below:
SACEP-South Asia
Following the first meeting of ASPA-INECE in Bangkok in
September of 1998 reported in INECE Newsletter #1, the
South Asia Cooperative Environmental Program prepared
its Subregional workprogram for supporting capacity building
and networking in environmental law, implementation and
enforcement within individual  countries  and regionally.
SACEP used this workprogram which was developed with
support from the regional UNEP office in Bangkok, the
Netherlands Inspectorate for the Environment and INECE
Secretariat and approached donor organizations for support.
NORAD, the Norwegian  development aid agency which is
supporting  other SACEP  programs now has agreed  to
support this multi-year  program.  Elements of the
workprogram include: Information exchange; Integration of
environment in development decision making; Compliance
with and  enforcement of regulations; Implementation  of
environmental conventions; Promoting multi-stakeholder
participation; Awareness raising and public participation; and
Transfer of appropriate  environmental technologies and
sharing of experiences. Specific objectives of the training
courses to educate environmental officers of the 7 respective
countries of South Asia on effective and proven methods of
enforcement and compliance as experienced in different
countries throughout the world. The courses will be designed
             so as to  provide maximum relevance to the particular
             situations of the compliance and enforcement regimes of
             the respective countries of South Asia.
             Southeast Asia
             The World Bank Institute sponsored a workshop June 19-22,
             2000 for 51 participants from all countries within Southeast
             Asia, several from South Asia, and from key supporting
             institutions on:  "Regional Cooperation for Strengthening
             Environmental Compliance and Enforcement in Asia." The
             objectives of the workshop were to assist countries in their
             efforts to strengthen capacity for enhancing environmental
             compliance and enforcement, and to identify mechanisms
             and approaches  for promoting regional cooperation in
             environmental compliance and enforcement.  Participants
             included officials and senior inspectors from environmental
             agencies dealing with environmental compliance and
             enforcement (at the national level), officers from the attorney
             general's department  handling prosecutions  under
             environmental legislation, and customs officers dealing with
             enforcement of environmental conventions and law.  It was a
             first for the International  Network for  Environmental
             Compliance and Enforcement (INECE) partnership as the
             World Bank Institute inaugurated a new program  on
             Environmental Compliance and Enforcement, which will likely
             be extended to  other regions around the globe.  The Bank
             team worked closely with the INECE Secretariat, UNEP's
             Regional Environmental Law Program for Asia and the Pacific,
             the Asia Pacific Center for Environmental Law, and former
             and current inspectors from the Netherlands Inspectorate
             for the Environment and USEPA in developing and delivering
             the workshop. The workshop presentations and discussions
             explored four major themes:
                a) General compliance and enforcement issues,
                  including approaches and environmental concerns at
                  the country, regional and international level and the
                  link to enforcement effectiveness and governance
                  issues.
                                                                  (Southeast Asia - Continued on next page)
        15
The International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement

-------
INECE
1200 PENNSYLVANIA AVE, NW MC 2251  A
WASHINGTON, DC 20460
USA
               (Southeast Asia - Continued)
   b) Effective compliance and enforcement case studies,
     exploring issues related to compliance and
     enforcement under the Basel Convention on
     transboundary movements of hazardous waste and
     illegal logging in the Philippines.
   c) Compliance and enforcement processes for
     addressing industrial and air pollution, including
     enforceable licenses and permits, technical capacity
     for monitoring and enforcement, capacity to impose
     meaningful consequences for violations; and voluntary
     compliance, public participation, and access to
     information.
   d) Field visit and mock inspection of a power  plant.
The  workshop  reinforced the importance of  exchanging
information and experiences among countries in the region;
the need for innovative approaches to involve the private sector
and the public in environmental compliance and enforcement
efforts; and the importance of targeted capacity building,
training, and awareness raising activities for inspectors,
prosecutors, judges, police and customs officials. There is
much room for regional efforts, ranging from streamlining basic
definitions  and standards (such as defining "toxic" or
"hazardous" waste) to specific monitoring and surveillance
of hot spots (for example, forest land used for illegal logging
and conversion to agriculture) through GIS technology.
The focus of the program is consistent with World Bank
priorities on achieving sustainable development and good
governance practices. World Bank Institute and UNEP are
currently exploring ways to collaboratively deliver cost-effective
national workshops  for Mekong Countries,  South and
Southeast  Asian countries.  The US-Asia Environment
Partnership and USEPA senior inspection personnel are
helping to organize regional inspector training and train the
trainer programs over the next year to leave the region with a
cadre of trainers and a core of additional trained inspectors.
The World Bank will also explore future provision of translated
training  and background materials, and follow-up training
activities (both face-to-face and via distance learning) in
national languages for greater reach and impact. ฃ
 Disclaimer: This document conveys no rights or privileges in connection with any of the members of the Executive Planning
     Committee, their organizations, or sponsors of INECE.

-------