UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
THE ADMINISTRATOR
May 15,2006
The Head Librarian
EPA's Headquarter Library
Room 3340 EPA West Building
MC: 3404T
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Librarian:
Enclosed arc two copies of the 2005 reports of the U.S. National Advisory
Committee (NAC) and the U.S. Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). This
notification is provided to you in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FAC A) Section 13.
NAC Advice letters:
• Advice letter: May 20, 2005
• Advice letter: November 16. 2005
GAC Advice letters:
• Advice letter: May 19,2005
• Advice letter: November 22, 2005
Sincerely,
Oscar Carrillo
Designated Federal Officer
Recycled/Recyclable
Printed with SoyfCanola Ink on paper thai
contains at least 50% recycled fiber
-------
IMS. Governmental Advisory Committee
Independent Federal Aitruorj
on the North American
Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
Committee
Members
Chair
Stephen M Mahfood
Telephone 573-694-6150
E-mail kasmahf@cs com
Designated Federal Officer
Oscar Camllo
Tel 202-233-0072
camllo oscar@qa.gov
Charles Collette
Florida
Michael J Colvin
Ohio
Lisa Cover
New Mexico
Robert Huston
Texas
Karl Kalbacher
Delaware
Sarah D. Lile
Michigan
James R Mate
Texas
Ricardo Martinez
California
Placido Dos
Santos
Arizona
Harvey Rubin
Florida
Colin Soto
Arizona
May 19,2005
The Honorable Stephen L. Johnson
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Administrator Johnson:
The Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) to the U.S. Representative to the
North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) met from April 27
through April 29th, 2005, in Washington, D.C. It is my pleasure to submit to you the
following report from our meeting. This letter provides advice on four major topics: 1)
Capacity Building, 2) the CEC's Operational Plan and Budget and its relation to the Ten-
Year Review recommendations, 3) the Article 10(6) process, and 4) issues related to
information sharing and the use of GAC expertise.
First, we would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on becoming the 11th
Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. We look forward to working
with you and providing you relevant and timeJy advice.
In addition, we would like to express our appreciation to all of the private sector
representatives who provided valuable information on environmental capacity building
activities in Mexico. We especially want to thank three members of the National Advisory
Committee who were instrumental in making the Business Roundtable a success, namely
Aldo Morell, from DuPont, Rich Guimond, from Motorola and Adam Greene, from the U.S.
Council for International Business.
We also want to recognize the work of EPA's Office of Cooperative Environmental
Management for their hard work in organizing our meetings. We appreciate the participation
of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and EPA's Office of International Affairs.
The information they provided was very useful in developing our advice. Doug Wright's
presentation on behalf of the CEC Secretariat was also very useful in understanding the
current status of the budget and the Commission's strategic direction. In addition we would
like to thank Duiker Desai, a member of Joint Public Advisory Committee for participating
in our meeting.
Administrative support Tor the GAC is provided by the U S environmental Protection Agency, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management
Mail Code I60IE, 655 15*51 Suite 800 Washington, D C 20005
(1)202-233-0072 (0 202-233-0060
-------
We spent most of our time on the topic of environmental capacity building which is one of the guiding
pillars in the new CEC strategic plan. Our meeting included a one-day Business Roundtable to examine
successful environmental capacity building initiatives by the private sector and others in Mexico. The
Roundtable brought together senior industry and multilateral organizations to learn about successful
environmental partnerships. The roundtable included a wide spectrum of speakers ranging from DuPont,
Motorola, to the World Bank and USAID. Both the GAC and NAG members were very impressed with the
caliber of speakers and presentations. Please see attachment A for a copy of the Roundtable agenda.
We hope our advice is useful in developing U.S. positions on capacity building and for your
preparations for the CEC Council Session in Quebec City, Canada on June 21-23. If your schedule permits,
we would very much welcome the opportunity to meet with you there, as the GAC did last year. We would
also like to pursue a joint meeting of the advisory committees, as we have traditionally done in the past.
Sincerely,
Stepfte^ M. Njahfobd, Chair
Governmental Advfcory Committee
cc. Judith Ayres, Assistant Administrator for EPA's Office of International Affairs
Jerry Clifford, Deputy Assistant Administrator for EPA's Office of International Affairs
John Knox, Chair, U.S. National Advisory Committee
Arturo Duran, Chair, Joint Public Advisory Committee
Jean Perras, Chair, Canadian National Advisory Committee
Members of the U.S. Governmental Advisory Committee:
Charles Collette Sarah D. Lile
Michael Colvin James R. Matz
Lisa Cover Ricardo Martinez
Robert Huston Harvey Rubin
Karl Kalbacher Placido Dos Santos
Colin Soto
-------
Governmental Advisory Committee
to the U.S. Representative to the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Advice 2005-1: Environmental Capacity Building
As you know, the CEC is going through a process of deep introspection to see how it can
improve the impacts of its initiatives The Ten-Year Review of the North American Agreement
on Environmental Cooperation and the NAFTA recommended among other things that "the
CEC should seek a more systematic engagement of the business community " Thus, the Business
Roundtable was a way to make this a reality by beginning the engagement.
During our Roundtable meeting we heard presentations from private sector
representatives, multilateral organizations, and foundations on the subject of successful
environmental capacity activities in Mexico. We were quite impressed with the wide-array of
successful projects on the ground in Mexico. We saw significant potential for collaboration
among the different non-governmental entities working in Mexico. The CEC can play an
important catalyst role in fostering that collaboration. We recommend that the U.S. support the
CEC role of catalyst and empower the Secretarial to take the lead in aligning private sector
capacity building activities
We recommend that the U.S. share with the CEC Council the various presentations and
summary of the NAC/GAC Roundlable meeting The CEC should serve as an information
clearinghouse on capacity building projects throughout North America. In the short-term, we
recommend that the CEC develop a compilation of successful environmental capacity building
partnerships on their website.
We are also highly supportive of an initial CEC capacity building conference; bringing
together 12 to 15 companies and/or organizations to start the process of developing synergies
among existing private sector capacity building efforts. The CEC can serve as the catalyst that
ties together a lot of the current capacity building activities in the region. The CEC can play a
key role in developing a strategic approach to capacity building. Also, we feel it is important
that the U.S. allow this process to move forward without setting too many walls or prescriptive
guidelines. Organizations involved in capacity building are doing the work based on their
enlightened self-interest. We recommend that the U.S. support this collaborative exercise in
order to create critical mass for future productive action. We are mindful of the political realities
in the NAFTA countries and support the CEC developing strong ties in the private sector,
foundations, and academia, which will provide long-term sustamability for capacity building
initiatives
-------
Governmental Advisory Committee
to the U.S. Representative to the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Advice 2005-2: CEC Program Plan & Ten-Year Review and Assessment Committee
(TRAC)
We would like to commend the Secretariat and the Parties for continuing to work at
implementing the TRAC Report recommendations and the three pillars developed in the Puebla
Council Session in 2004. We acknowledge that 2004 and 2005 have been transition years as it
relates to the development of the CEC's Operational Program Plan and Budget. However, we
believe that in order to keep CEC programs running efficiently and effectively, future program
plans should not take a year to be negotiated and approved by the Parties. We recommend that
during the Council Session in Quebec City, the U.S. propose a process to ensure the approval of
the 2006 Program plan by December 2005. We encourage the U.S. to provide the GAC with a
draft of the 2006 Program Plan and Budget prior to our meeting in October 2005.
In addition, we have challenged the U.S. to support the CEC being a "conveyor belt" for
addressing important continental environmental issues. In pursuing the conveyor belt metaphor,
we recommend the development of brief action reports after the Secretariat has handed-off
projects to other qualified organizations. This will serve as a self-affirmation of project closures.
We consider this report a key tool that will assist the U.S. in realizing the goal of maintaining a
productive and focused Secretariat. Such brief action reports should be no longer than 3 to 5
pages.
Furthermore, we believe the TRAC report contains very valuable recommendations As
the U.S. takes the leadership of the CEC Council in July 2005, we encourage the U S to use the
TRAC recommendations as a point of reference for the next year. We recommend that the U.S
encourage the CEC Council to follow the TRAC report's fourteenth recommendation which
states that "the Council, with the executive director's assistance andJPAC's advice, report
publicly on the implementation of the these recommendations, including those which have been
fully or partially implemented and those which have not, with the reasons, to the 2006 annual
meeting of the Council. " The GAC feels that the Council's response should also include how
they will incorporate appropriate TRAC recommendations into the CEC's Operational Plan and
Budget.
-------
Governmental Advisory Committee
to the U.S. Representative to the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Advice 2005-3: Article 10(6) Working Group
The GAC was pleased to hear that the Article 10(6) Environment and Trade Officials
Working Group are meeting regularly and making progress on the Trade and Environment pillar
set forth in the Puebla Declaration We commend the group for coming to the near completion
of their "project assessment criteria." Furthermore, per our advice 2004-1, we want to
reemphasize that the "CEC should not be too heavily involved in project implementation
activities, instead it should always be looking for outside implementation opportunities i.e,
handing off projects to other qualified organizations " We recommend that the final project
assessment criteria in the Trade and Environment pillar incorporate the element of "handing off"
successful projects as a component of their project timeline
-------
Governmental Advisory Committee
to the U.S. Representative to the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Advice 2005-4: Information Sharing and Use of GAC Expertise
The GAC is always appreciative of the opportunity to provide advice to the U S.
government on issues related to the implementation on the North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation. The GAC represents the views of State, local, and tribal
governments. In this section, we would like to address a few recommendations that wilt make
our consultative efforts more effective. In past meetings we have been charged with answering
questions from EPA prior to our meetings. These questions are very important to the GAC and
help us to focus our discussions During our April meeting we did not receive any specific
charges and this made our advisory role more difficult to grasp. We understand there arc staff
shortages in the Office of International Affairs, but we want to reiterate the importance of
receiving specific requests for advice so as to focus our attention appropriately.
Furthermore, we think EPA's Office of International Affairs missed an opportunity to hear
first-hand of the good work being done by numerous organizations on environmental capacity
building in Mexico that was reported at the Business Roundtable on April 27th. Please see
attachment A for a copy of the Business Roundtable agenda.
------- |