2019 Great Lakes Commission Annual Meeting Réunion Annuelle de la Commission des Grands Lacs 2019 OCTOBER 9-11, 2019 • QUÉBEC
1300 Victors Way, Suite 1350 Ann Arbor, MI 48108-5203 734-971-9135 • www.glc.org
@GLCommission facebook.com/greatlakescommission #GLCQC19 p. 3 AGENDA
p. 9 Minutes
p. 30 Action Items
p. 107 Strategic Plan Progress Reports p.153 Reference
HILTON QUÉBEC • 1100 BOULEVARD RENÉ‐LÉVESQUE EAST • QUÉBEC, QC • G1R 4P3 • 1 418‐647‐2411 FINAL DRAFT AGENDA – 10/3/2019 – ORDRE DU JOUR PROVISOIRE
Wednesday, October 9 Mercredi, le 9 octobre All times EST / Heure de l’Est
Activities at the National Assembly (GLC Board & Staff) Activités à l’Assemblée nationale (conseil d’administration et employés de la CGL)
10:00 a.m. Motion: 20th Anniversary of Québec’s Participation in the Quebec National Assembly Great Lakes Commission GLC Board of Directors Motion: 20e anniversaire de la participation du Québec à la Commission des Grands Lacs
11:00 a.m. Visit to the Quebec National Assembly Tour: Great Lakes Commission Board Visite de l’Assemblée nationale Remarks: Invited dignitaries
12:00 p.m. Lunch with Québec Legislative Assembly Salon de la présidence Representatives Hosts : Gilles Bélanger, Carlos Leitão Déjeuner avec des élus de l’Assemblée nationale du Québec Table service
Meeting of GLC Board of Directors (GLC Board & Staff) Rencontre du conseil d’administration de la CGL (membres du conseil et employés seulement)
1:30 p.m. Meeting of GLC Board of Directors Sainte-Foy/Portneuf, Hilton Québec Rencontre du conseil d’administration de la CGL GLC Board, staff • Update: Exploring options for consensus‐based binational Guests: Jerry Cormick, Glenn Sigurdson, and ballast water management policy Dana Goodson • Interim Finance Committee report • Blue Accounting and the Great Lakes Commission • Additional Board meeting items TBA
5:00 p.m. Closing Remarks: Adjourn for Dinner with Commission Mot de clôture : ajournement pour le dîner avec la Commission 2019 GREAT LAKES COMMISSION ANNUAL MEETING • QUÉBEC
5:30 p.m. Working Dinner/Business Meeting Beauport/Beaumont/Bélair, Hilton Québec Dîner de travail
6:45 p.m. 2019 Annual Meeting: Call to Order, Welcoming Remarks John Linc Stine, Chair Rencontre annuelle 2019: ouverture de la réunion, mot de bienvenue
6:55 p.m. Welcome to Québec GLC Québec Delegation Bienvenue à Québec
7:05 p.m. Business of the Great Lakes Commission John Linc Stine, Chair Affaires de la Commissions des Grands Lacs • Roll Call and Welcome • Recognize and welcome new commissioners • Approval of Meeting Agenda • Approval of Minutes from 2019 Semiannual Meeting • Introduction and discussion of Draft Resolutions
8:00 p.m. Meeting Adjourns until Thursday Ajournement de la rencontre jusqu’à jeudi
Thursday, October 10 Jeudi, le 10 octobre
Commission Work Session (Commissioners & Staff Only) Séance de travail de la Commission (commissaires et employés seulement)
7:00 a.m. Breakfast Courville/Montmorency, Hilton Québec Petit-déjeuner
7:45 a.m. Business of the Great Lakes Commission Palais, Hilton Québec Affaires de la Commission des Grands Lacs
• Call to order John Linc Stine, Chair • Report of the Chair Darren Nichols, Executive Director • Report of the Nominating Committee • Election of Officers • Approval of Resolutions • Staff report and issue updates
9:45 a.m. Break Grande Place, Hilton Québec Pause
Page 2 of 6 2019 GREAT LAKES COMMISSION ANNUAL MEETING • QUÉBEC
NOTE: Public Registration opens at 9:00 a.m. / L’inscription débute à 9 h
October 10 – Great Lakes Commission Annual Meeting (All are welcome) 10 octobre – Rencontre annuelle de la Commission des Grands Lacs (Bienvenue à tous)
10:00 a.m. Welcome from Huron‐Wendat Nation Marcel Godbout Mot de bienvenue de la Nation Huronne-Wendat Palais, Hilton Québec
10:15 a.m. Welcome from the Great Lakes Commission John Linc Stine, Mot de bienvenue de la Commission des Grands Lacs Chair Great Lakes
10:20 a.m. Interim update: A binational mediation team will provide an Jerry Cormick, mediator/facilitator overview of exploratory conversations relating to a binational Glenn Sigurdson, mediator/facilitator ballast water policy for the Great Lakes‐St. Lawrence Basin Mise à jour : Une équipe de médiation binationale offrira un résumé des conversations exploratoires liées à une éventuelle politique binationale de gestion des eaux de ballast pour le bassin des Grands Lacs et du St-Laurent.
10:45 a.m. Regional Approaches for Planning and Investment Moderator: This session will present and discuss regional initiatives for Darren Nichols, Great Lakes Commission assessment and planning for conservation, economic development, infrastructure investment, and public policy Joe Tovar, University of Washington Approches régionales en matière de planification et Gail Krantzberg, McMaster University d’investissement Cette séance comportera une présentation et une discussion sur les initiatives régionales d’évaluation et de planification en matière de conservation, de développement économique, d’investissements dans les infrastructures et de politiques publiques.
11:55 a.m. Adjourn for Lunch Ajournement pour le déjeuner
12:00 p.m. Opening Lunch: Kent & St. Louis, Hilton Québec Welcome from GLC Chair and Québec City Deputy Mayor (TBC) Table service Luncheon Keynote: Chantal Rouleau, Delegate Minister for Transport, Government of Québec
Déjeuner d’ouverture : Mot de bienvenu du président de la CGL et de la maire suppléante de la Ville de Québec (AC)
Allocution : Mme Chantal Rouleau, Ministre déléguée aux Transports, Gouvernement du Québec
Page 3 of 6 2019 GREAT LAKES COMMISSION ANNUAL MEETING • QUÉBEC
12:55 p.m. Annual Meeting Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks GLC Chair Assemblée annuelle: ouverture de la séance et mot de bienvenue
1:05 p.m. Keynote Presentation: Green, Smart and Lean – The Rotterdam Monica Swanson, Business Digitization approach to future‐proofing a Maritime economy Manager, Port of Rotterdam Présentation d'ouverture: Écologique, intelligente et économique – L'approche de Rotterdam pour pérenniser l’économie maritime
1:30 p.m. Maritime Industry in the 21st Century : Sustainability and Moderator: Steve Fisher, Great Lakes Competitiveness in un a Changing World Commission and American Great Lakes Ports L’industrie maritime au 20e siècle: durabilité et compétitivité Association dans un monde en mutation Claudine Couture‐Trudel, QSL Nicole Trépanier, SODES Philippe Filion, Group Ocean Monica Swanson, Port of Rotterdam
2:20 p.m. Break Pause
2:30 p.m. Addressing Resiliency through Water Infrastructure Moderator: Victoria Pebbles, This panel will cover topics such as water infrastructure needs and Great Lakes Commission activities across the basin, water resiliency best practices, Danielle Dagenais, Université de Montréal tools for municipalities and others Julien St‐Laurent, Ville de Trois‐Rivières Aborder la résilience par le biais des infrastructures d’eau Deputy Mayor Michelle Morin‐Doyle, Chair, Ce panel portera sur des sujets tels que les besoins et les activités Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative en matière d’infrastructures d'approvisionnement en eau dans le bassin, les meilleures pratiques en résilience de l’eau, les outils pour les municipalités, etc.
3:30 p.m. AquaHacking Challenge – Awards Presentation Naysan Saran, CANN Forecast Defi AquaHacking – Présentation des gagnants Rachel Labbé-Bellas, The Green Stop
3:40 p.m. Blue Economy and Green Tech Moderator: Matt Doss, Great Lakes opportunities in water innovation, clean Great Lakes Commission technology, and sustainability John Austin, Michigan Economic Center Économie bleue et Technologies vertes David Bolduc, Green Marine Opportunités en matière d'innovation dans le domaine Nan‐b de Gaspé Beaubien, de Gaspé de l'eau, des technologies propres et de la durabilité Beaubien Foundation dans les Grands Lacs.
Page 4 of 6 2019 GREAT LAKES COMMISSION ANNUAL MEETING • QUÉBEC
4:30 p.m. Open Public Comment Attendees are invited to address the This time is reserved for Observers, guests and the public to Commission address the Commission on topics of interest to the Great Lakes (please sign‐in at Registration Table to Basin. speak, speaking time may be limited Commentaires publiques depending on number of speakers) Cette plage horaire est réservée aux observateurs, aux invités et au public afin qu’ils puissent adresser leurs questions à la Commission.
5:15 p.m. Invitation to 2020 Semiannual Meeting TBA Invitation à la rencontre semi-annuelle 2020
5:25 p.m. Closing Remarks GLC Chair and Vice Chair Mot de clôture
5:30 p.m. Adjourn Annual Meeting GLC Chair Ajournement de la rencontre annuelle
6:00 – Evening Reception for Commissioners, Observers and Guests L'Observatoire de la Capitale 8:00 p.m. Réception pour les commissaires, les observateurs et les invités Édifice Marie-Guyart, 31st floor
Friday, October 11 Vendredi, le 10 octobre
Commission Work Session (Commissioners & Staff Only)
7:00 a.m. Breakfast 2nd floor foyer, Hilton Québec Petit-déjeuner
7:50 a.m. Reconvene, Call to Order Recap of Day 1 and Housekeeping Beauport/Beaumont/Bélair, Items Hilton Québec GLC Chair Reprise de la rencontre, retour sur la 1re journée et points d'ordre administratif
8:00 a.m. Presentation: Jeffrey B. Litwak, Adjunct Professor of Final Draft Legal Assessment of the Great Lakes Basin Law, Lewis and Clark Law School and Compact and the Great Lakes Commission Senior Counsel to the Columbia River Gorge Commission
Présentation: Richard L. Masters, Special Counsel, and Projet final d’évaluation juridique de l’entente sur le Bassin des Nahale Freeland Kalfas, Legal Counsel, Grands Lacs et sur la Commission des Grands Lacs Council of State Governments National Center for Interstate Compacts
nd 10:00 a.m. Break 2 floor foyer, Hilton Québec Pause
Page 5 of 6 2019 GREAT LAKES COMMISSION ANNUAL MEETING • QUÉBEC
10:15 a.m. Opportunities for Increased Collaboration with the GLC Chair, Introduction of IJC Commissioners International Joint Commission (IJC) Occasions de collaboration accrue avec la Commission mixte internationale Commissioners and staff from the International Joint Commission and the Great Lakes Commission will discuss topics of mutual interest, including lake levels, resilient communities, ballast water policy, and more.
12:00 p.m. Working Lunch Great Lakes Commission and invited guests
Déjeuner de travail International Joint Commission International Joint Commission members and members of the Blue Accounting Advisory Committee will join the Great Lakes Blue Accounting Advisory Committee Commission for a working lunch and discussion of the future of 2nd floor foyer, Hilton Québec Blue Accounting and principles of using shared data, metrics and goals to inform and strengthen policy decisions for the Great Lakes Basin.
12:30 p.m. Great Lakes Commission: Inaugural meeting with Great Lakes Commission and Blue Accounting Advisory Committee Blue Accounting Advisory Committee Commission des Grands Lacs: Rencontre inaugurale avec le Comité consultatif de Blue Accounting The Great Lakes Commission and the Blue Accounting Advisory Committee will discuss the next generation of Blue Accounting, following the Commission’s adoption of Blue Accounting and Blue Accounting Principles NOTE: International Joint Commission members are encouraged to join this meeting with GLC and Blue Accounting advisory committee
2:30 p.m. Adjourn Meeting GLC Chair Fin de la rencontre
Page 6 of 6
Minutes
Attached, for review and approval, are minutes from the Commission’s 2019 Semiannual Meeting, held May 21-23 in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Included for your information are minutes of the Board of Directors conference calls held on April 18, May 16, June 20, July 2, July 18, and August 15, 2019.
Great Lakes Commission 2019 Semiannual Meeting Weber’s Boutique Hotel, Ann Arbor, MI May 21-23, 2019
Summary Minutes
Summary of Actions 1. Approved minutes of the 2018 Annual Meeting held October 1-3, 2018 in Indianapolis, Indiana. 2. Approved one resolution: Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 3. Approved an action item to rescind the 2009 resolutions Coastal Zone Management Act Reauthorization: An Opportunity to Fund and Implement the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy and Address Climate Change; Great Lakes-Great Jobs: Great Lakes Commission Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Priorities for Great Lakes Restoration and Economic Revitalization; Support for the 2009 Annual AWEA Windpower Conference in Chicago; and rescind and replace the 2009 and 2013 resolutions Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and Priorities for the Great Lakes navigation system in the federal Water Resources Development Act with the updated approved resolution. 4. Announced the date for the GLC Annual Meeting to be held October 9-11, 2019 in Québec City, Québec.
May 21, 2019
City of Detroit Field Trip 11:45 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.
GLC staff facilitated a field trip for Commissioners, visiting sites along the waterfront in the city of Detroit.
May 22, 2019
Working Session/General Discussion - Commissioners and Staff 8:00 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.
GLC Chair John Linc Stine and Executive Director Darren Nichols facilitated an orientation for new and returning Commissioners on the GLC’s history and accomplishments, the powers and authorities of the Great Lakes Basin Compact, the 2017-2020 GLC Strategic Plan and GLC operations and procedures for conducting business. Commissioners noted that under the Great Lakes Basin Compact, the GLC has a responsibility to engage and interact with other existing regional bodies of governance and play a key role in consensus-building throughout the Great Lakes Basin.
Nichols also facilitated a session on the importance of conducting an independent assessment of the GLC and Great Lakes Basin Compact, including internal and external considerations, benefits of an assessment, and potential timing of the assessment. The delegations each shared views, comments and feedback expressing support for conducting the legal and administrative assessments. Several common themes emerged such as the need for the states to consider a higher level of funding to support GLC operations, the need to consider the GLC’s role in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River region through the lens of the Compact and the role of facilitation, coordination and consensus building across the full-range of issues and interests in the region.
1
Semiannual Meeting Summary Minutes
May 22, 2019
The Annual Meeting was called to order at 11:05 a.m. EDT by GLC Chair, John Linc Stine (MN). The following Commissioners, Associate Commissioners and Alternates were present: Loren Wobig, Stephanie Comer - Illinois Sharon Jackson, Kay Nelson, Bruno Piggott - Indiana Candice Miller, James Clift, Jennifer McKay, Stanley Pruss, Marc Smith - Michigan John Linc Stine, Ann Rest - Minnesota Jim Tierney, Eileen Murphy - New York Jim Weakley, Laurie Stevenson - Ohio Tim Bruno, Pat Harkins, Kathy Dahlkemper - Pennsylvania Jean-François Hould, Frederic Lecomte, Marc Gagnon - Québec Dean Haen, Todd Ambs, Steve Galarneau, Noah Roberts - Wisconsin
Staff present: all 1) Call to order, opening remarks: Chair Stine called the meeting to order and welcomed new Commissioners/Alternate Commissioners attending their first meeting.
2) Roll Call: Executive Director Darren Nichols called the roll. A quorum was present with all eight states and Québec represented at the start of the meeting.
3) Approval of Agenda: Chair Stine briefly reviewed the agenda for the meeting. A motion to approve the agenda was made by Indiana, seconded by Illinois. The agenda for the meeting was approved unanimously.
4) Approval of minutes of 2018 Semiannual Meeting: Chair Stine called for a motion to adopt the minutes of the 2019 Annual Meeting in Indianapolis, Indiana. A motion to approve the minutes was made by Wisconsin, seconded by Québec. The minutes were approved unanimously. Chair Stine noted that minutes from Board meetings held between October 2018 and March 2019 were also included in the briefing packet for informational purposes.
5) Observer Request: Chair Stine presented a request by Green Marine to become an Observer. A motion to approve the request was made by Québec, seconded by Ohio. The request was approved unanimously.
6) Presentations of Resolutions and Action Items: Stine presented and summarized the action items under consideration by the GLC to be voted on the following day. There was on new resolution titled: Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, and four resolutions passed at the 2009 Semiannual Meeting and a fifth resolution passed in 2013 that were considered for sunsetting. Stine asked individual Commissioners to provide background on each resolution as appropriate.
Commissioner Weakley (OH) provided background on the new resolution - Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. Over time, the fund has built $9.3 billion in revenue. There are currently 140 federally authorized navigation projects in the U.S. Great Lakes navigation system, and 3.3 million cubic yards of sediment that requires dredging each year in U.S. Great Lakes ports, harbors, and navigation channels. Current configuration of U.S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Operations & Maintenance (O&M) budget insufficiently prioritizes critical Great Lakes navigation system assets. Reforming the Harbor Maintenance Tax (HMT) and the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF), enacted to fund USACE O&M, to require full appropriation of HMTF revenues
2
would allow the USACE O&M budget to more appropriately address the half-billion-dollar backlog in maintenance needs to the system. The resolution is focused on the appropriation side; the necessary authorization was provided in 2014. There is no substantive change to the previous GLC position on the issue.
Commissioner Galarneau (WI) discussed three resolutions recommended to be sunset and two recommended to be sunset and replaced with an updated single resolution (the new Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund resolution). A committee of three Commissioners (Loren Wobig (IL), Jennifer Schultz (MN) and Steve Galarneau (WI)) met to review the resolutions. The committee recommended the following resolutions for sunsetting: Coastal Zone Management Act Reauthorization: An Opportunity to Fund and Implement the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy and Address Climate Change; Great Lakes-Great Jobs: Great Lakes Commission Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Priorities for Great Lakes Restoration and Economic Revitalization; Support for the 2009 Annual AWEA Windpower Conference in Chicago. The committee recommended that the 2009 and 2013 resolutions Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and Priorities for the Great Lakes navigation system in the federal Water Resources Development Act be rescinded and replaced.
7) Discussion/Consultation on Recommended FY2020 Budget: The GLC Board of Directors is responsible for approving the annual budget of the GLC. Article VII Section 8 of the bylaws requires the budget to be received by the Board of Directors at least 45 days prior to the start of the fiscal year and approved by the Board following an opportunity for consultation with the full Commission. Recent practice has been for the Board to receive the budget in mid-April and approve it in mid-May, 45 days prior to the beginning of the fiscal year on July 1. Each year, the Board appoints an ad hoc Finance Committee comprised of three or four Board members to work with staff on the development of the Commission’s annual budget. The Finance Committee met via conference call on April 10, 2019 to review and discuss the proposed FY2020 budget. Following the committee meeting, the Finance Committee presented a report and recommendations to the GLC Board at the Board’s April 18, 2019 conference call. In recent prior years, the full Commission was consulted on the draft budget via conference call. This year, because the semiannual meeting is being held later in the year, input is being sought in-person at the meeting. Chair Stine acknowledge the larger than usual proposed drawn down on GLC financial reserves and explained that the use of reserve funds will be necessary to balance the budget and pay for other organizational priorities including the proposed administrative assessment. He also noted that state dues have not changed since 2002 creating a more frequent need to dip into reserves to balance the budget.
Brief discussion ensued. Commission Deputy Director Tom Crane clarified the history and current balance of the Commission reserve fund. In recent years, reserve funds have been used to support administrative and operational costs not covered by state dues. He also presented the history of state dues amounts and increases. State support to the GLC has not increased since 2002. Crane explained that to adjust for inflation only, annual dues would need to increase by approximately $26,000 per state. Other discussion topics included some mild concerns about the proposed reduction in the training budget; the general importance of maintaining and protecting the reserve fund and opportunities to grow the reserves in the future. Brief discussion also occurred regarding opportunities for support from the Canadian provinces and the importance of the assessment to inform decisions on long-term strategy for state support to the GLC.
Chair Stine outlined next steps, noting that the vote on the budget would take place the following day. He recommended that Board members approve the budget because it provides the support needed to continue operations and allows the GLC to move forward on other items under consideration by the agency.
3
8) Lunch: Chair Stine adjourned the business meeting at 11:50 a.m. EDT. Commissioners, observers and guests gathered for lunch. During lunch Chair Stine and Executive Director Nichols provided remarks about the importance of the Commission’s work to the Great Lakes region and the value of partnerships with the Commission’s observers and guests.
9) Reconvene and Call to Order: At 12:45 p.m. EDT, Chair Stine reconvened the meeting and welcomed Observers and guests. He introduced the welcome speaker.
10) Welcome to Michigan: The Honorable Dana Nessel, Michigan Attorney General and Great Lakes Commissioner, gave opening remarks about the importance of working together to protect the shared Great Lakes resources. She welcomed the opportunity to work with her fellow Commissioners to ensures the Great Lakes remain a world class resource supporting the regional economy and quality of life for the region’s residents. She highlighted several priorities for her office including addressing PFAS pollution; the debate over the definition of “Waters of the U.S.” within the Clean Water Act; oil spill risks from pipelines; combined animal feeding operations (CAFOs); climate change; and invasive carp. She concluded saying that the Commission is both a meaningful and impactful organization and that she hoped that its work will be long-lasting and benefit generations to come.
11) Great Lakes Water Tension in the 21st Century: Peter Annin, author of “Great Lakes Water Wars” and Director of the Mary Griggs Burke Center for Freshwater Innovation at Northland College, spoke about growing tensions over Great Lakes waters in the 21st century. He spoke about the history of the Great Lakes Water Resources Compact that is in its 11th year and the ongoing problem of lack of access to clean water world-wide and the emerging problem now in the Great Lake-St. Lawrence River region. Annin provided examples of how straddling communities/counties (those that straddle drainage divides between the Great Lakes and other drainage basins) are challenging water managers charged with implementing the water resources compact and regional water resources agreement. He talked briefly about emerging issues and situations in Waukesha, Wisconsin and Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin among others. He concluded by saying that overall, he believes that the compact and regional agreement are working as expected.
12) Building Consensus for a Sustainable Future: Tools for Resolving Conflict towards Collaborative Governance: Jerry Cormick, a principal with the CSE group, with a long history of successful mediation and facilitation on a variety of issues, spoke about consensus processes (the art of the possible) in working toward consensus on difficult issues. He reviewed two case studies: the Lower Colorado River Multispecies Conservation Plan and the Yukon Plaster Mining Regulatory Regime. Both included a consensus building process that required intensive stakeholder involvement.
13) Roundtable Discussion: A series of short presentations and discussions focused on the needs, opportunities and roles in the future of a Great Lakes Basin “stewardship economy.” The speakers included Maria Carmen Lemos, University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability; Neil Hawkins, Fred A. And Barbara M. Erb Family Foundation; and Sanjiv Sinha PhD, ECT Consulting.
14) Roundtable Discussion: A series of short presentations described the power and potential of Blue Accounting to build consensus and support Great Lakes restoration and the Basin economy. The speakers included Helen Taylor, from the Nature Conservancy, Bob Lambe, from the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, David McLean from the Dow Chemical Company and Joel Brammeier from the Alliance for the Great Lakes.
15) Business of the Great Lakes Commission: Chair Stine moderated a session addressing the following Commission business items:
4
• Resolution – Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. This resolution calls on the Great Lakes Congressional Delegation to support a long-term solution for harbor maintenance funding. There was brief discussion and some clarifying questions about two of the “whereas” clauses. These were answered by Commissioner Weakley and no changes were suggested. A motion was made by Indiana and seconded by Michigan to approve the resolution as presented. There was no further discussion among Commissioners. Action: The motion to approve the draft resolution passed unanimously. Action Item – Sunsetting 2009 and 2013 Resolutions. The Commission had previously discussed the sunsetting of the following Resolutions: Coastal Zone Management Act Reauthorization: An Opportunity to Fund and Implement the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy and Address Climate Change; Great Lakes-Great Jobs: Great Lakes Commission Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Priorities for Great Lakes Restoration and Economic Revitalization; Support for the 2009 Annual AWEA Windpower Conference in Chicago; Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund; and Priorities for the Great Lakes navigation system in the federal Water Resources Development Act.
A motion to approve the action item was made by Illinois and seconded by Pennsylvania. There was no further discussion among Commissioners.
Action: The action item as presented was approved unanimously.
16) Invitation to the 2019 Annual Meeting: Chair Stine invited Jean-François Hould, Québec Delegation Chair to the podium. Hould presented a short video and invited Commissioners and guests to the 2019 Annual Meeting, to be held October 9-11, 2019 in Québec City, Québec.
17) Adjournment: Chair Stine moved to adjourn the meeting. He invited the Commissioners and guests to a reception at the Wyndham Garden Hotel just down the road from Weber’s Inn. The motion to adjourn was seconded by the Commissioner from Indiana and seconded by the Commissioner from Québec and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned for the day at 4:40 p.m. EDT.
May 23, 2019 Working Session - Commissioners and Staff 8:20 a.m. – 12:10 p.m.
18) Reconvene: Chair Stine called the working session to order at 8:20 a.m. EDT. He briefly recapped the previous day, discussed a few housekeeping items, and thanked the Michigan delegation for their hospitality and Consul General of Canada for their sponsorship of the meeting.
19) Welcome to Commissioners: The honorable Joe Comartin, Canadian Consul General in Detroit opened his remarks by recognizing that the cooperative and harmonious relationship between Canada and U.S. is long-standing, crucial and unique. He noted that the Great Lakes unites the two countries, makes us responsible to each other, and reflects the best of our countries’ relationship. Comartin then spoke about the key Great Lakes priorities for Canada, starting with cleaning up the remaining Areas of Concern and the need for continued monitoring and remediation efforts. He also pointed to the continuing problem of Lake Erie algal blooms that have returned and need to be addressed. To address this problem, he noted that the Lake Erie Action Plan, developed by Canada and Ontario, includes 120 voluntary and
5
mandatory actions from sewage treatment to fertilizer standards. Comartin commented that ballast water regulatory requirements are also a priority and are being established for ships discharging to Canadian waters. He reported that Canada would like to see the U.S. move in the same direction and align technology with the needs of the Great Lakes to ensure there are not foreign species entering the water. Comartin also highlighted climate change as an urgent issue and priority, reporting that Canada has been a leader and will meet the terms of the Paris Agreement. He identified several specific initiatives that will be a key part of Canada’s progress and noted that these climate commitments will bring positive impacts to the economy in the form of green jobs and new technologies.
Comartin then discussed the key role of trade in the relationship between the U.S. and Canada. Canada is the top trading partner in 37 states and noted that the tariffs imposed by the current U.S. administration tarnishes the relationship between the two countries. Comartin said that Canada is looking forward to rehabilitating the relationship and thinks the recent agreement to lift the tariffs is a good positive step. Comartin discussed the ongoing construction of the Gordie Howe bridge, scheduled to open in 2024. He stated the new border crossing at Detroit is an absolute need as the current bridge is old and poorly maintained, though will continue to operate. He provided benefits of the new crossing, including that it will be a more efficient way to transport goods, have more technologically advanced cargo screening, and the redundancy of another crossing will enhance security in the event of a terrorist attack or crisis. To close, Comartin emphasized the importance of the countries’ relationship and the need to put dents behind us. He called on the U.S. and Canada to continue to cooperate on Great Lakes protection and use the existing relationship to facilitate that cooperation. 20) Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (VIDA) Discussion Panel: Chair Stine introduced a session to discuss VIDA provisions, goals, and Commission involvement in working toward a binational solution regarding ballast water management. Chair Stine noted that rather than waiting for the U.S. to promulgate its rule in accordance with VIDA, the Board considers it wise to begin a transparent, neutral, consensus-based, binational approach to be incorporated into the U.S. EPA proposed rulemaking. Chair Stine reported that the U.S. EPA’s Office of Water and Members of Congress have not indicated their willingness to rely on such a consensus-based approach. He stated that the Board’s current intention is to continue to move forward convening a broad stakeholder group outside of the federal rulemaking process. The draft federal rule is proposed for January 2020, meaning that this is unique opportunity with a narrow time frame to act.
Brian Manwaring introduced the U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution (USIECR) as a federal program dedicated to environmental collaboration and conflict resolution. Dana Goodson (via phone) shared the Regional and National Ocean Planning work of the USIECR, highlighting capacity building and facilitator services among diverse stakeholders.
Jerry Cormick, a Principal with the CSE Group, discussed the importance of the collaborative framework process and identified key questions to start the process. Cormick acknowledged that the January 2020 timeline presents difficulties in building consensus. Glenn Sigurdson (via phone) elaborated on the process, noting it will be iterative as more stakeholders are engaged. He discussed establishing a foundation for collaboration as a critical element of the process.
The Commission reflected on the timeline challenges and if a unique approach for the Great Lakes would be preferable over a uniform national approach. Canada is in a different place than the U.S. on ballast water, and concerns were voiced that the processes would not align well. The ballast water agreement in Canada will go into effect next year and the Ballast Water Convention requires technologies to be incorporated by September 2024. Given that Transport Canada is ready to implement new measures by next year, their process does not appear to accommodate the Great Lakes Commission to ensure there is only one set of standards.
6
The Commissioners echoed general interest in a collaborative process under ideal circumstances but identified time as an impediment. It was noted that the U.S. promulgation will be litigated, so while timeline is limited there will be lags in the implementation that may provide additional space for consensus-building.
It was clarified that the current suggestion from the Board is exploration of stakeholders and the relationships of their interests, but no proposal has been made to the U.S. EPA. Chair Stine indicated that the Board has determined that it is worth investing in the potential of a consensus-based process. Chair Stine relayed that the Board agreed the process cannot be done without fully engaging interests on the Canadian side of the border.
The extent of the collaborative process was discussed, noting that it is not just the standard but the mechanism of implementation and overall understanding of the circumstances that could be impacted. It was acknowledged that there would be an ongoing conversation beyond rulemaking, including implementation, technology, and management practices, and the Commission could contribute to that conservation.
Chair Stine noted the need to decide about taking a first step, acknowledging the long-term benefits from consensus conversation on this issue that will remain in the Great Lakes. Executive Director Nichols stated that the GLC will benefit with the type of conversations that USIECR is proposing.
In closing, the Commissioners expressed a cautious approval to proceed engaging this process but requested greater details on process and cost ahead of next board call.
21) Agency Administrative Assessments: Dr. Craig Shinn of the Center for Public Service, Hatfield School of Government at Portland State University provided an overview presentation of an administrative assessment proposed for the GLC. Shinn mentioned the importance of having a better sense of organization structure and function and a better delineation or roles and responsibilities between the Board, commissioners and staff.
Shinn stated that a fair amount of organizational management centers around the strain between the roles we create and the people who are in those roles. Shin stated there is more than one appropriate model, so the questions center on finding the best model for the organization.
Shinn discussed types of roles in organizations and how they fit together and noted that the proper consideration of the staff role is critically important. Shinn noted the importance of understanding networks between different organizations, and the strength of network ties.
Nichols provided a general endorsement of the importance of periodic assessments to agencies like the GLC.
22) Legal Assessment of the Great Lakes Basin Compact for the GLC: A team of attorneys and legal scholars from the National Center for Interstate Compacts (NCIC) described their work to assess the Great Lakes Basin Compact – its history and authorities – and potential roles for the GLC and the Great Lakes states and provinces in general to use the Compact more effectively going forward. Presenters included Richard L. Masters, Special Counsel, Council of State Governments (CSG) (NCIC); Nahale Freeland Kalfas (participating by phone), Legal Counsel, (CSG) (NCIC); and Jeffrey B. Litwak, Adjunct Professor of Law, Lewis and Clark Law School and Senior Counsel to the Columbia River Gorge Commission. The panelists briefing introduced themselves.
7
Litwak described how a legal assessment is a tool to inform the overall GLC assessment; to inform strategic planning (i.e., to inform legislative, regulatory, and judicial planning); and to inform commissioners and staff.
Litwak described four specific points the legal assessment team is looking for regarding the Great Lakes Basin Compact: 1) elements of modern interstate compacts, 2) administrative procedure and transparency, 3) how courts interpret compacts, and 4) Ontario and Québec’s participation. He also noted examples of related organizations’ administrative procedures, including examples from the Columbia River Gorge Commission, and examples of how courts interpret compacts. Litwak noted that the legal assessment team will be looking at how Ontario and Québec obtain their authority to participate across the border.
Litwak outlined the legal assessment team’s planned steps: 1) collect information; 2) prepare a template of legal and administrative principles; 3) prepare a draft statement of the Compact and authorities; 4) prepare a draft legal assessment report; 4) present the draft assessment report at the GLC Annual Meeting in October; and 5) prepare a final report.
Nichols thanked the legal assessment team and spoke about the value of a legal assessment. Nichols requested commissioners inform the team if they have areas of interest to be covered in the legal assessment.
Chair Stine requested the legal assessment highlight anything envisioned by the founders of the Compact regarding how to pay for the compact agency’s work. He also requested the assessment highlight the financing dialogue in the forming documents, if any such dialogue existed.
Litwak noted an important part of a compact is having a “funding provision,” but one of the problems with having a funding provision in a compact document is that these provisions may be constraining and inflexible.
Bruno (PA) asked that the legal assessment cover historical conversations that led to the GLC being formed.
Smith (MI) asked for the assessment to report on the history of the water resources compact and how (if at all) this compact relates to or conflicts with the Great Lakes Basin Compact.
Stine thanked the legal assessment team for an informative presentation.
23) Follow up discussion on the GLC budget and reserve funds
Stine reviewed the previous day’s budget discussion and suggested the need to better define the management and use of the GLC’s reserve fund including possibly setting a dues threshold level to protect the reserve fund into the future. Stine stated an additional need for an earnest conversation about supplemental dues, and requested the conversation take place promptly so Commissioners may present requests to state budgets.
Stine offered the idea of forming an “Interim Finance Committee” populated with interested Board members and commissioners to be charged with the above mentioned tasks. Several Commissioners volunteered to serve. Stine welcomed their service but suggested that the final membership be set when the Board formally establishes the Committee, hopefully on its June conference call.
8
Stine stated a desire to avoid going another 19 years before asking for additional funding. Bruno noted we might be able to ‘strike while the iron is hot’ in certain jurisdictions to do more expedient financial asks.
Stine asked for a motion to approve the FY2020 budget as presented on May 22. A motion to approve the budget was made by New York and seconded by Indiana. The motion to approve the budget passed unanimously.
24) Closing Remarks and Adjournment: Vice Chair Sharon Jackson (IN) closed the meeting and provided brief remarks regarding old and new friends gathering to make and keep the Great Lakes great. She noted the desire to take the Great Lakes to the next level environmentally and economically, and to protect them as a beautiful resource. She thanked all for their dedication and attention and said that she looks forward to meeting in the fall in Québec City.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 12:10 p.m. EDT.
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas R. Crane Deputy Director
9
Great Lakes Commission Board of Directors Conference Call Minutes April 18, 2019
The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. EDT by John Linc Stine, board chair. The following members were present:
Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana James Clift - Michigan John Linc Stine - Minnesota Jim Tierney - New York Mindy Bankey - Ohio Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Steve Galarneau - Wisconsin
Staff present: Darren Nichols, Tom Crane, Victoria Pebbles, Matt Doss, Beth Wanamaker, Erika Jensen, Nicole Zacharda, Joe Bertram, Eric Ellis
1) Introductions and Call Objectives: Galarneau asked to include a discussion of raising the dues on an interim basis to the agenda. The Board unanimously approved the meeting agenda and the March 21 minutes.
2) Finance Committee Update – report on 2020 Budget: The Board received a memo on the FY20 budget in advance of the call. The operating budget has been proposed at $4.3 million, a slight decrease over FY19 budget. Based on projected revenue and expenses for the assessment ($150,000 in FY20), the budget will be unbalanced. The Finance Committee suggests going into reserves (which currently stand at about $900,000) to balance the budget. Pass through funds for FY20 are estimated at $13.3 million. Concern was raised over the amount of drawdown from the reserves over the last 4-5 years, and that trend continuing. However, state dues do not cover expenses and that has made drawdowns necessary. State dues are currently only about three percent of the budget. It was noted that even if dues are doubled, which would be politically difficult in many states especially considering the possibility of a financial downturn, it still would not cover expenses. Staff is exploring options for additional funding. Action will be taken on the FY20 budget at the Semiannual Meeting.
3) VIDA – GLC Update: The EPA Region 5 Deputy Director has acknowledged receipt of the GLC VIDA letter and are working on a response. The Board’s concerns over use of STAG funding were shared with him informally. Conversations are ongoing with potential neutral third parties.
4) Invasive Mussel Collaborative (IMC) Board Statement: The statement was previously passed on an 8-1 vote: Pennsylvania voted no, and Michigan abstained but offered comments during the voting period. Illinois voted yes but offered clarifying questions similar to Pennsylvania’s concerns. Staff asked the Board to provide a determination on whether to amend the statement. Bruno explained that Pennsylvania wanted to clarify that the IMC cannot proceed with a control treatment without the approval of the state that has jurisdiction. Jensen clarified that any experimental treatment would be discussed with the states in advance and approvals would be secured. Pennsylvania would vote yes with language clarifying this point. Clift noted Michigan has some minor edits and concerns over whether the full Commission should vote on the issue. While the Board in practice has operated with the authority to act on statements, the practice may need to be clarified in the future. Bruno moved to amend the statement to address Pennsylvania’s concerns and consider the practice of the Board or Commission voting on the statement at a future time; Galarneau seconded. Michigan abstained from the vote, all other jurisdictions voted yes.
5) Project proposals:
1
a. Symposium on dredging windows: Last summer, the GLC Board approved to have GLC staff, on behalf of the Great Lakes Dredging Team, pursue support from the Great Lakes Fishery Trust to plan and convene a symposium on environmental windows for dredging for the Lake Michigan basin. Crane is working with state agencies to pursue funding for the symposium. b. Conservation Kick: Zacharda presented a proposal for a new project called “Conservation Kick” which would create a direct online portal for businesses and individuals to contribute to reducing phosphorus losses into the Great Lakes, based on the model of crowdfunding. An additional benefit would be supporting local producers. The Board expressed interest in the project and encouraged reaching out to partners to leverage their expertise. Staff will share a short summary of the potential project. The Board agreed to share any additional feedback with Zacharda. c. Great Lakes Coastal Assembly: Ellis presented on staff participation in the Great Lakes Coastal Assembly. A memo on the topic was sent to the Board prior to the call.
6) Semiannual Meeting planning and agenda: Staff presented the current draft agenda for the Semiannual Meeting, which includes orientation time for new commissioners and one public afternoon/evening session. Tuesday includes field trips in Detroit and a short press event. The Board agreed to reach out to staff with any thoughts on the agenda.
7) Assessment Committee – Update: Three documents were provided to the Board in advance of the call. The committee has reached out to the Council of State Governments to undertake a legal assessment, of the Compact, which would lead three additional stages of an overall assessment. The committee agreed to clarify that all jurisdictions would be involved in each stage of the assessment. The Board discussed bringing the agreement for the legal assessment to the full Committee but did not pursue this option. No objection was raised to proceeding with the legal assessment.
8) Executive Director Update: This section was skipped because of time. The Board agreed to come back to the need for a dues increase at a future call.
With no further business, the call was adjourned at 11:05 a.m.
Respectfully submitted, Darren Nichols Executive Director /bw
2
Great Lakes Commission Board of Directors Conference Call Minutes May 16, 2019
The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. EDT by John Linc Stine, board chair. The following members were present:
Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana James Clift - Michigan John Linc Stine - Minnesota Jim Tierney - New York Mindy Bankey - Ohio Bill Carr - Ontario Jean-Francois Hould - Quebec Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Steve Galarneau - Wisconsin
Staff present: Darren Nichols, Tom Crane, Victoria Pebbles, Matt Doss, Beth Wanamaker, Erika Jensen, Nicole Zacharda, Joe Bertram, Eric Ellis
1) Introductions and Call Objectives: The Board minutes from April were approved unanimously.
2) Review Commissioner/Board Lists: This was informational only – the GLC’s lists have been updated recently following many new appointments. If there are additional updates let Nichols know.
3) Review Commission’s decision‐making processes in advance of Semiannual meeting: Nichols reviewed the decision-making process as defined in the Operations & Procedures manual, which refers to the Compact and Bylaws. Each jurisdiction has three votes regardless of composition of the delegation. Commissioners may delegate their votes to a proxy by providing notice to the executive director in writing in advance of a meeting. In practice, Ontario/Quebec have voted on all programmatic decisions of the GLC (resolutions, etc.); the provinces do not vote on the budget or on U.S. federal legislative priorities.
4) Review and Approve Actions/Resolutions to be forwarded to the Commission: Crane reviewed the action items and resolutions to be reviewed at the Semiannual Meeting, which include a consultation on the FY2020 budget, which will be presented for approval by the Board, either at the meeting or on the June Board call. Wobig (IL) moved to consider the resolutions; Clift (MI) seconded. The resolutions and action items were approved for consideration by the Commission at the 2019 Semiannual Meeting unanimously.
5) Review Final Draft May 21‐23 Commission Meeting Agenda: Nichols reviewed the agenda for the May 21-23 Semiannual Meeting. Staff will change the agenda to read “consultation on the FY2020 budget.”
6) Quarterly Financial Report: Bertram presented the quarterly financial report. Salary and benefits are under budget but the general budget is overbudget year-to-date. Bertram noted the GLC currently expects to finish the year with a net loss between $125-150,000; the agency originally budgeted for a loss of $100,000.
7) Invasive Mussel Collaborative (IMC) Board Statement: Staff sought feedback from the Board on how to move forward with the joint IMC statement. Carr (ON) moved to endorse the statement; Jackson (IN) seconded. Staff clarified that most of the large beds of invasive mussels on the bottom of the lakes are mostly in Lakes Michigan, Ontario and Huron. The statement was approved unanimously by the Board.
8) Project proposals: Doss presented a proposal for a project building on the GLRI economic impact report released last fall. He is planning a workshop in the summer. Eric Ellis, Project Manager for the Coastal Conservation and Habitat Restoration Program, presented an opportunity to host an intern to study the
1
socio-economic impacts of Great Lakes habitat restoration. This study is an off shoot of a previous GLC project with Grand Valley State University in the Muskegon Lake Area of Concern which demonstrated a 6 to 1 economic return on restoration dollar investments. The intern is a graduate student at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy and is sponsored by the Japanese government. Pebbles noted that during last month’s Board call, Zacharda presented an initial proposal for the Conservation Kick project; a more elaborate proposal was included in the Board packet. This project would also build on relationships with the agriculture community that were built through the Erie P Market and GLSNRP projects. Nichols noted an update on the process of developing a white paper on the status of coastal resiliency in the Great Lakes was included in the Board packet: the GLC could apply to the NSF to convene a conference on needs in this space. However, as the GLC is not eligible to serve as primary investigator; the University of Michigan has offered to fill that role. EPA and the Great Lakes Protection Fund were recommended as partners for the white paper. Nichols noted that he has not yet reached out to the Coastal States Organization. He has heard that they would want to look at coasts more broadly than the Great Lakes and may take a narrower look at coastal resiliency than the GLC would. Board members with additional questions are encouraged to reach out directly to Nichols. Nichols agreed to send an email to the Board for additional feedback on each project.
9) Executive Director Update:
With no further business, the call was adjourned at 11:05 a.m.
Respectfully submitted, Darren Nichols Executive Director /bw
2
Great Lakes Commission Board of Directors Conference Call Minutes June 20, 2019
The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. EDT by John Linc Stine, board chair. The following members were present:
Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana John Linc Stine - Minnesota Jim Tierney - New York Mary Mertz - Ohio Bill Carr - Ontario Tim Bruno (joined late) - Pennsylvania Steve Galarneau - Wisconsin
Staff present: Darren Nichols, Matt Doss, Beth Wanamaker, Erika Jensen, Joe Bertram, Victoria Pebbles (joined late)
1) Introductions and Call Objectives: The June agenda and May Board minutes were approved unanimously.
2) Executive Director’s Report: Nichols noted that staff has developed several project proposals and asked for Board approved to send them via email for discussion offline. This plan was accepted. Nichols also discussed recruitment for the Senior Advisor for External Relations – two candidates have currently been interviewed and the position will be open until it’s filled. There is also an open senior-level information management position that will be posted in the next few weeks. The IJC is currently holding workshops around the region focused on their role and general priorities for the Great Lakes Basin. Nichols encouraged Board members and Commissioners to attend. Nichols has been contacted by USGS about convening a science forum on coastal resiliency, as well as funding support for a white paper. Tierney and Galarneau support the GLC pulling together regional work on coastal resiliency. Nichols noted that the GLC does not have funding to pursue the work at this time; he recommended that the states contribute to support the project rather than pursue a grant. Galarneau noted that GLRI funding could be pursued. Tierney noted that GLNPO has indicated a request from the states for funding on this issue would be welcomed. Nichols asked for Board approval to prepare a proposal and it was received. Stine asked him to be inclusive of any funding opportunities.
3) Status Update: Brandon Road Lock & Dam: Wobig noted that he Corps has finished the chief’s report with the intention of forwarding it to Congress. The Corps have asked Illinois to SIGN a preliminary design agreement that will confirm the elements of the project and move forward to design phase. Illinois is waiting for coordination with the other Great Lakes states and IS setting up a meeting July 16-17 in Chicago for the states to discuss each component included in the chief’s plan. Wobig noted that Michigan and Illinois have been coordinating on responses. Wobig noted that each state will be allowed more than one attendee and encouraged states to include staff who can respond to both technical and policy/funding considerations. Wobig noted that the GLC has served as a fiscal convener for the Soo Locks in the past and could potentially participate in that role for Brandon Road. Nichols asked that the GLC be included as an observer to negotiations if that potential role was being considered.
4) Solicit Actions/Resolutions to be considered by the Commission: Stine suggested updating past resolutions on coastal resiliency. Galarneau suggested reevaluating what has been said in past resolutions about climate change and resiliency and suggested a call to action.
5) Solicit Commission Annual Meeting Agenda items: Mertz suggested an update on coastal wetlands design and technology in the Basin.
1
6) Select and establish an Interim FY 2021 Finance Committee: Stine noted that the Board received a memo on this topic prior to the call and that many of the suggested committee members volunteered. Galarneau asked that Haen be replaced with Ambs due to conversation about state funds. Stine asked for a motion from the Board approving the concept of the memo and suggested working individually with the Board on the members. Tierney moved; Bruno seconded. The motion was approved unanimously.
7) Vessel discharge: consensus-based dialogue: Congress created a process for the Great Lakes states and governors to create a special process for ballast water discharge in the Basin. EPA has indicated that its rule may be adopted in January 2020, potentially later. A draft Canadian federal rule has been published. A variety of other maritime transportation issues could also be considered. There is a proposal to hire a neutral third-party to begin exploratory conversations. The outcomes from the conversations could help guide federal rulemaking and future GLC work. Stine asked for Board authorization for exploring the potential for consensus around some key concepts. The work would involve interviews with Jerry Cormick and Glenn Sigurdson; they would provide analysis from those interviews by mid-July. This work is estimated to cost $41,500. Galarneau asked if there is an opportunity to get additional proposals from Great Lakes organizations or universities to do this work. Stine noted that significant previous binational work was a major consideration. Nichols noted that in-region partners might have baggage and that this would only be the first step of an assessment. Nichols noted he believes that work in this area will prompt members of Congress to appropriate the funding included for the GLC in the Coast Guard Authorization bill. Nichols noted he has asked the environmental federal agencies if they are willing to invest or find acceptable funding for this process and they indicated it is possible. Stine asked for a motion to authorize the exploratory step of contracting with Cormick and Sigurdson: Jackson moved; Stine seconded. Galarneau suggested including additional funding in case costs run over; the motion was approved unanimously.
With no further business, the call was adjourned at 11:05 a.m.
Respectfully submitted, Darren Nichols Executive Director /bw
2
Great Lakes Commission Board of Directors Conference Call Minutes July 2, 2019
The meeting was called to order at 11 a.m. EDT by John Linc Stine, board chair. The following members were present:
Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana John Linc Stine - Minnesota Jim Tierney, Don Zelazny - New York Bill Carr - Ontario Jean Francois Hould - Quebec Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Steve Galarneau - Wisconsin
Staff present: Darren Nichols, Tom Crane, Beth Wanamaker
1) Brandon Road Lock & Dam conversation: Nichols asked the Board to authorize the GLC to provide neutral facilitation services in support of IL and MI’s work to convene the states to address the threat of Asian carp at the Brandon Road Lock & Dam. Tierney had to leave but said that New York approves of the GLC serving as a neutral facilitator. Nichols discussed the materials sent to the Board in advance of the call, including an invite to a meeting on July 16-17 in or around Chicago to discuss options for Brandon Road. He recapped the GLC’s history of work on Asian carp and Brandon Road and authorizations provided to the GLC under the Great Lakes Basin Compact. He noted the GLC is prepared to invest $40,000 of funding for the meeting, which would come out of an existing $300,000 grant from the Joyce Foundation.
2) Voting: Wobig (IL) motioned to consider the proposal; Jackson (IN) seconded. Galarneau asked for clarification that the June 30 memo was for background and not part of the motion; Nichols confirmed. Galarneau noted that he cannot commit to a requirement that WI will not hold any press events; however, he is not aware of any. Nichols noted that he had offered that consideration as a best practice, but that requirement is not part of the motion and encouraged the jurisdictions to refrain from conversations that are not part of the process. Zelazny noted that representatives will need to confer with other parties on decisions; Nichols encouraged the jurisdictions to refrain from conversations with other parties as much as possible before July 16. The motion was approved unanimously.
With no further business, the call was adjourned at 11:40 a.m.
Respectfully submitted, Darren Nichols Executive Director /bw
1
Great Lakes Commission Board of Directors Conference Call Minutes July 18, 2019
The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. EDT by John Linc Stine, board chair. The following members were present:
Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana James Clift - Michigan John Linc Stine - Minnesota Don Zelazny - New York Bill Carr - Ontario Jean Francois Hould - Quebec Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Steve Galarneau , Noah Roberts - Wisconsin
Staff present: Darren Nichols, Tom Crane, Matt Doss, Beth Wanamaker, Erika Jensen, Victoria Pebbles
1) Introductions and Call Objectives: The July agenda and June 20 and July 2 Board minutes were approved unanimously.
2) Great Lakes Basin Compact – Legal assessment – project update: Jeff Litwak gave an update on the status of the legal assessment of the Great Lakes Basin Compact. The team has been looking at the Compact’s authority’s in relation to other regional organizations and have been considering the GLC’s unique legal competencies. They are still looking for some state’s legislative histories – several jurisdictions recommended reaching out to state historians to get this information. They expect to have a draft report by August 12. The jurisdictions will have two or three weeks to respond. A final draft of the report will be presented at the October annual meeting. The assessment team will incorporate comments and present a final report following the annual meeting.
3) Administrative assessment: Craig Shinn summarized his work so far. The first phase of the assessment is looking at organizational health, resource and financial management and contracting. Nichols will send his draft to the Board.
4) Executive Director’s Report: Nichols announced the hiring of Eric Brown as Senior Advisor for External Relations. A leadership position in information management will be posted soon.
5) Status Update: Brandon Road Lock & Dam: Wobig recapped the meeting in Illinois on the Brandon Road Lock & Dam. Illinois and Michigan will be sending out a press release this morning. The meeting facilitators will provide a formal summary within the next two weeks.
6) Solicit Actions/Resolutions to be considered by the Commission: Crane noted that there is a resolution review committee call soon to look at resolutions to be considered for sunsetting.
7) Solicit Commission Annual Meeting Agenda items: Hould presented Quebec’s proposed agenda items at the annual meeting, which include green infrastructure, climate change, clean technology, tribal relations, and others. Nichols noted he has received a request for conversation between GLC commissioners and new IJC commissioners.
1) Vessel discharge: update on efforts to convene a consensus-based dialogue: Jerry Cormick and Glenn Sigurdson from the CSE Group provided an update on the status of their efforts to begin a dialogue toward a consensus-based binational solution for ballast water management. The team noted they will
1
working toward recommendations which may not become final until after the EPA releases their revisions to the vessel general permit (VGP) standard in December 2020.
With no further business, the call was adjourned at 11:05 a.m.
Respectfully submitted, Darren Nichols Executive Director /bw
2
Great Lakes Commission Board of Directors Conference Call Minutes August 15, 2019
The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. EDT by Sharon Jackson, board vice chair.
The following members were present:
Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana James Clift - Michigan Jim Tierney, Don Zelazny - New York Kerith Brand - Quebec Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Mindy Bankey - Ohio Steve Galarneau , Noah Roberts - Wisconsin
Staff present: Darren Nichols, Tom Crane, Matt Doss, Joe Bertram, Eric Brown.
1) Introductions and Call Objectives: The August agenda and July 18 Board minutes were approved unanimously.
2) Quarterly Financial Report: Joe Bertram reviewed the financial report for the quarter ending June 30. These are un-audited figures. The auditors will be beginning work on the annual audit in the fall. Currently, for the entire 2019 fiscal year, we are under budget on indirect cost recovery by about 32%. This is a result of five staff who left the GLC in FY 2019 and were not replaced. Thus, we did not recover indirect costs from salaries and indirect costs from these staff. All states have paid their dues for the past year. We still have about $726,000 in reserves, although we have been drawing these down. The finance committee met recently and is working on a policy for reserve funds, a dues increase, and other matters. Commissioner Clift asked about the change in the deficit shown on the statement compared to the previous report. Tom Crane noted the impact of less indirect cost recovery, which could not be projected accurately previously due to staff who left the GLC during the last quarter. Drawdown of reserves are impacted by cashflow needs. Clift expressed concern about how expenses are presented and the impact on the current year’s budget. He asked for further updates on these issues. Crane will be arranging a call with the finance committee next week to review the auditor’s report.
3) Executive Director’s Report: GLC Executive Director Nichols provided the following updates:
• Update on legal and administrative assessments: The first draft of the legal assessment of the compact has been received; this will be reviewed with the executive committee and then with the full board. Dr. Shinn has provided some initial observations and recommendations for potential team members to work on the administrative assessment, including the agency’s finances. The Board is asked to recommend other individuals who could be part of this team. The aim is to have the team in place by the time of the annual meeting in Quebec. • Recruitment updates: Chief Information Officer: We have a final draft position announcement for this position, which will fill the role previously held by Steve Cole. Nichols invited recommendations for individuals for this position and urged the Board to share the position announcement when it is released. • Brandon Road Lock and Dam – facilitated dialogue: We have received a meeting summary for the two-day meeting held in July. There is an open question about next steps and whether the states wish to continue with facilitated dialogue. Loren Wobig noted that there was some misunderstanding in the summary about whether the Corps can accept funding from other entities on behalf of the nonfederal sponsor; the summary says it cannot, but the Corps says it can. Illinois has drafted a
1
preliminary engineering and design (PED) agreement with the Corps and is working on a draft intergovernmental agreement; both documents are under review in the governors office. He is preparing an update for the meeting participants. Illinois is interested in continuing to use the facilitators as discussion of potential agreements moves forward. Nichols emphasized the need for further discussion about the long-term role of the GLC in working with the states on solutions to preventing the introduction of Asian carp, including the Brandon Road project. • Vessel Discharge – binational exploratory conversations: The facilitators continue to have conversations with key stakeholders interested in this issue. Board members are encouraged to speak with them. We expect to have recommendations around the time of the annual meeting. • New Legislation Reauthorizing the GLRI: Matt Doss noted that bipartisan legislation has been introduced in the House and Senate reauthorizing the GLRI and gradually increasing the authorized funding level from $300 million to $475 million in FY 2026. The GLC is on record supporting the GLRI and Doss invited the Board’s concurrence to support this legislation. There was discussion of a potential resolution supporting the GLRI and its reauthorization. It was suggested that the GLC consider any current resolutions related to the GLRI that could be updated.
4) Solicit Actions/Resolutions to be considered by the Commission: Jackson noted the memo about review of resolutions that are ten years old to be rescinded, updated or retained. New resolutions are also invited to be considered at the annual meeting, with the aim that these be drafted and vetted in advance of the meeting. The resolution review committee recommended that the 2009 resolution on the water-energy nexus be rescinded and updated with support from a small committee of commissioners. Clift noted that one of the Michigan commissioners is interested in a resolution on the Brandon Road issue; he will reach out to him to clarify his interest in helping with this resolution. Commissioner Roberts is interested in drafting resolutions on the energy-water nexus and on climate change. He committed to providing draft resolutions before the next board call. Nichols asked that Commissioners coordinate with GLC staff immediately about potential resolutions and a schedule for having drafts prepared by Sept. 12 in advance of the Sept. 19 Board call. Jackson asked Nichols to send a reminder email to Commissioners about the process and schedule for submitting resolutions.
5) Review Commission Annual Meeting DRAFT Agenda: Jackson noted the draft agenda and said that the final agenda will be approved on the next board call. Nichols briefly reviewed the draft agenda. Online registration will begin soon and the block of hotel rooms are available to reserve.
6) Board Round Table: Jackson invited any updates from the Board members.
With no further business, the call was adjourned at 10:45 a.m.
Respectfully submitted, Darren Nichols Executive Director /md
2
Action/Information Items
• Resolution – Support for Congressional Reauthorization of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative: GLRI was initiated in 2009 by the U.S. federal government and has been subsequently reauthorized several times over the past 10 years. Funding has remained fairly constant at approximately $300 million annually and was last authorized in 2016, for a period extending to 2021. This funding has supported implementation of more than 4,700 projects, including cleanup work for Areas of Concern, support for fisheries, prevention of excessive nutrient loading, and many others. Reauthorizing GLRI and supporting current Congressional efforts to increase funding to $475 million annually would expand the impact of this successful program.
• Action Item – Recommended actions for sunsetting previous GLC Policy Resolutions: The Commission currently has three active resolutions related to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI): o Resolution - Maintaining Leadership and Sustain Progress in Restoring the Great Lakes and Revitalizing Our Regional Economy (2010) o Resolution – Extending the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Beyond 2014 (2012) o Resolution – Advancing Phase II of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and Passing Comprehensive Great Lakes Legislation (2013) Pending consideration of the proposed new resolution - Support for Congressional Reauthorization of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (Draft), the Resolutions Review Committee recommends sunsetting the above resolutions and replacing it with the new GLRI resolution.
• Action Item – Recommended action extending a previous GLC Policy Resolution: The Resolutions Review Committee reviewed The Water Energy-Nexus: Linking Water and Energy Planning in the Great Lakes (2009) in its annual review of resolutions ten years old or older. Commissioner discussion included the possibility of updating and expanding the 2009 resolution to include the topic of food in the existing nexus. The Resolutions Review Committee recommends that this resolution remain active and that the Commission commit to discussing and updating the resolution to include food in a future meeting.
• Resolution – Related to the Public Health Risk from Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) and regional Action to Bolster Collaboration: PFAS have emerged as a pervasive contaminant in all Commission jurisdictions, with increasing public awareness and concern surrounding the existence of these chemicals throughout the environment and the related cleanup efforts. States and Provinces have begun more aggressive regulatory and response efforts in the absence of significant federal action. This resolution would establish intra- and interstate collaboration to address PFAS and would call upon U.S. and Canadian federal governments to increase their respective levels of participation, coordination, and action related to PFAS. Note: the Commission has an active resolution addressing Contaminants of Emerging Concern broadly, including PFAS and others: Addressing Contaminants of Emerging Concern (2017). This resolution is included for reference purposes.
• Resolution – Great Lakes Commission Commitment to Implement Blue Accounting Principles: The Great Lakes Commission initiated Blue Accounting in the 2014 resolution Establishing Blue Accounting: A collaborative re-engineering of Great Lakes information strategy and delivery (included for reference purposes). In 2015, the Commission partnered with The Nature Conservancy (TNC) to jointly develop Blue Accounting, which was publicly launched in October 2017. The Commission and TNC have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to guide transition of management and governance of Blue Accounting to the Commission by the end of 2019. This resolution would commit the Commission to serve as the governing and managing agency responsible for Blue Accounting and commit the Commission’s Board of Directors to serve as the Blue Accounting Steering Committee on or before December 31, 2019.
• Resolution – Recognizing the Value of Commercial Shipping on the Illinois Maritime Transportation System: The Illinois Maritime Transportation System is an important system of navigable inland waterways that provide significant economic impact on the Great Lakes region. It is a critical connection between the Mississippi River and Great Lakes systems, serving as a “western door” to the Great Lakes. This resolution would recognize the economic importance and value of the Illinois Maritime Transportation System and support Illinois’ efforts to strengthen and expand maritime commerce through the Illinois Marine Transportation System.
• Resolution – Acknowledging the Risks of Climate Change and Advancing Regional Resilience: Climate change and its impacts threaten the health and vitality of the Great Lakes Basin, including environmental, economic, and public health. This resolution would commit the Commission to acknowledge the global crisis of climate change and the risks that ongoing climate change poses to Basin and would commit the Commission to work collaboratively on efforts related to resilience and adaptation. It would also call on the federal governments of the U.S. and Canada to acknowledge and take action to address climate change.
• Resolution – Celebrating the 20th Anniversary of Québec’s and Ontario’s Declaration of Partnership with the Great Lakes States and Great Lakes Basin Compact: The Great Lakes are an important, binational natural resource that link the eight U.S. Great Lakes states and two Canadian Great Lakes provinces geographically and economically. Québec and Ontario formalized their relationship with the Great Lakes Basin Compact in 1999 in a Declaration of Partnership signed by all Great Lakes jurisdictions. This resolution would commend the jurisdictions for their 20 years of formal binational partnership and commit to continuing to work together to accomplish the purposes of the Compact.
• CONCEPT Resolution – GLC Officeholder Transition Support, Long-Term Vision, and Compact Recommitment: This resolution would recognize the unique nature of the Great Lakes Basin Compact, create a neutral, nonpartisan guiding document to outline basin-wide governance to newly elected and appointed officials, and recommit the jurisdictions to accomplishing the long-term vision and purposes embodied by the Compact.
• Informational Materials for Meeting with the International Joint Commission:
o International Joint Commission – Background Material o Great Lakes Commission – Background Material
RESOLUTION DRAFT – Sept. 30, 2019
Support for Congressional Reauthorization of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative
Whereas, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River are national treasures and environmental and economic assets of vital importance to the eight Great Lakes states, Ontario, Québec and two nations; and
Whereas, benefits from the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River continue to be threatened by the release of inadequately treated sewage, invasive species, toxic contaminants, degraded waterfront areas, deteriorating water infrastructure and inadequately maintained ports and harbors; and
Whereas, priorities established in 2003 by the governors of the eight Great Lakes states provided the foundation on which the region came together to develop the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes, a comprehensive restoration plan that has been broadly endorsed by the Great Lakes governors, states, cities, industries, tribal governments, federal agencies and environmental organizations; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) was initiated in 2009 to strategically target the most critical problems facing the Great Lakes, including • Toxic substances and Areas of Concern • Invasive species • Nonpoint source pollution impacts on nearshore health • Habitat and species • Foundations for future restoration actions; and
Whereas, the GLRI has established key components for an effective restoration program, including a detailed Action Plan with clear performance goals, an accountability system, and a funding plan that strategically aligns existing programs with those goals; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes region – including states, cities, tribes, business and industry, and nongovernmental groups – have invested significant time and resources to build the capacity to implement the GLRI and translate regional goals into site-specific actions that generate real benefits for local communities; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes states are critical partners in the success of the GLRI with the best knowledge and experience to ensure that resources are targeted at local priorities and several of the Great Lakes states have adopted Great Lakes restoration strategies and plans to complement federal restoration activities in their states; and
Whereas, the GLRI has supported the implementation of more than 4,700 projects across 300,000 square miles, generating significant progress, including completing cleanup work in 11 Areas of Concern, implementing conservation treatments on more than 700,000 acres of farmland and preventing more than 800,000 pounds of phosphorous from polluting the Great Lakes and contributing to harmful algal blooms, opening more than 5,000 miles of rivers to fish passage to improve native fish populations, and funding actions to prevent the spread of aquatic invasive species like Asian Carp that threaten the health of these freshwater jewels; and
Presented for consideration at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, October 9-11, Quebec City, Quebec.
Whereas, Great Lakes restoration is a wise investment in the region’s economy that is facilitating economic development in waterfront communities across the region, with one rigorous economic analysis projecting that every dollar invested under the GLRI will generate more than three dollars in additional economic activity over the next two decades; and
Whereas, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is finalizing a new, five-year GLRI Action plan to guide the program through Fiscal Year 2024 that establishes ambitious goals to sustain restoration progress in the GLRI’s five focus areas; and
Whereas, significant work remains to achieve regional restoration goals for the Great Lakes, including completing cleanup work in 19 remaining U.S. Areas of Concern, achieving phosphorous reduction goals for Lake Erie and implementing conservation actions on ten million acres estimated by U.S. EPA as needing financial assistance, restoring 1.5 million acres of habitat, and preventing the introduction and spread of harmful invasive species; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Basin’s states and communities are prepared to begin planning and investing in the future of stewardship, development and continued conservation of the Basin after its successful restoration; and
Whereas, Congress has consistently supported the GLRI with annual appropriations of approximately $300 million, and in 2016 formally authorized the program through Fiscal Year 2021; and
Whereas, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has passed the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Act of 2019, which increases the authorized funding level for the program over five years from $300 million to $475 million per year; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Basin Compact authorizes the Great Lakes Commission to advocate on behalf of the eight Great Lakes states in support of issues of common interest and, using this authority, the Commission has been a leading voice for full funding of the GLRI, and has advised Congress and federal agencies on principles for its implementation in a manner consistent with the views and priorities of the Great Lakes states.
Therefore, Be It Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission calls on Congress to continue funding the GLRI, develop clear shared objectives for GLRI investments, maintain the momentum made to date, build on investments made by the Great Lakes states and other partners, improve the objective accountability for investments in the Great Lakes Basin, and facilitate the long-term success of regional restoration efforts; and
Be It Further Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission calls on Congress to reauthorize the GLRI through FY 2026 and increase the authorized funding level to the first year’s appropriation of $475 million to provide U.S. EPA, the Great Lakes states, and other parties with the flexibility to address remaining restoration needs, leverage funding from nonfederal partners, and implement priority projects and programs to safeguard the environmental and economic health of the Great Lakes; and
Be It Finally Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission commends U.S. EPA and the other federal agencies for their dedication and hard work in implementing the GLRI and urges continued collaboration with the Great Lakes states to sustain its accountability and effectiveness, including planning for future needs and post-restoration investments.
Resolution proposed to be rescinded
Adopted Oct. 8, 2010
Resolution: Maintaining Leadership and Sustaining Progress in Restoring the Great Lakes and Revitalizing Our Regional Economy
Whereas, the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River are national treasures and environmental and economic assets of vital importance to the eight Great Lakes states, Ontario, Québec and two nations; and
Whereas, 45 million Americans and Canadians depend on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River for drinking water, recreation, fish and wildlife resources, power generation and commercial navigation, among other benefits; and
Whereas, benefits from the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River continue to be threatened by the release of untreated sewage, invasive species, toxic contaminants, deteriorating water infrastructure, inadequately maintained ports and harbors, and declining water levels due to climate change and other causes; and
Whereas, priorities established in 2003 by the governors of the eight Great Lakes states provided the foundation on which the region came together to develop the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes, a comprehensive restoration plan that has been broadly endorsed by the Great Lakes governors, states, cities, industries, tribal governments, federal agencies and environmental organizations; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Commission and the Council of Great Lakes Governors, in close collaboration with the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Healing Our Water-Great Lakes Coalition, Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, Council of Great Lakes Industries, Great Lakes Metro Chambers Coalition and a diverse array of other stakeholders have maintained a consistent and united regional voice calling for a robust federal-state partnership to implement the Great Lakes restoration strategy; and
Whereas, with leadership from the president, U.S. EPA and bipartisan support from Congress, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) was initiated in 2009 as a five-year program with a budget of $2.2 billion designed to strategically target the most critical problems facing the Great Lakes, including
Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern Invasive Species Nearshore Health and Nonpoint Source Pollution Habitat and Wildlife Protection and Restoration Accountability, Education, Monitoring, Evaluation, Communication, and Partnerships; and
Whereas, the GLRI advances the key federal policy goal of maximizing the benefits of the Great Lakes and investing in freshwater resources that will be central to the future of our nations and the Great Lakes region; and
Whereas, the GLRI has established key components for an effective, five-year restoration program, including a detailed Action Plan with clear performance goals, an accountability system, an independent scientific review panel, and a funding plan that strategically aligns existing programs with those goals; and
Resolution proposed to be rescinded
Whereas, the Great Lakes states have stepped forward to partner with the federal government to implement the GLRI by building capacity, translating the Initiative’s regional goals into site-specific actions, and providing the infrastructure needed to generate meaningful benefits for citizens in the Great Lakes region; and
Whereas; an unprecedented investment of time, human capital and scarce fiscal resources—at all levels of government—have launched the GLRI and put it on a trajectory to success; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Basin Compact authorizes the Great Lakes Commission to advocate on behalf of the eight Great Lakes states in support of issues of common interest and, using this authority, the Commission has been a leading voice for full funding of the GLRI, and has advised Congress and federal agencies on principles for its implementation in a manner consistent with the views and priorities of the Great Lakes states.
Therefore, be it resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission calls on Congress and the Administration to maintain their commitment to restoring the Great Lakes by approving legislation that will authorize sustained funding for the GLRI to build on past investments and ensure continued progress in environmental restoration and economic revitalization; and
Be it further resolved, that the Commission calls on its member states, together with local governments, business, academia and nongovernmental partners to continue their engagement in implementing the GLRI; and
Be it further resolved, that the Commission urges the region’s new and continuing political leaders—whether governors, state legislators, or members of the Great Lakes Congressional Delegation—to keep faith with their citizens who treasure the Great Lakes and have committed to restoring and conserving them as a source of cultural identity and economic prosperity;
Be it finally resolved, that the Commission reaffirms its mission and responsibility—as codified in federal and state law—to help its member states and provinces speak with a unified voice and collectively fulfill their vision for a healthy, vibrant Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region by advising the federal governments of the importance of full funding for the GLRI and other programs critical for Great Lakes protection and restoration.
Adopted at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, Toronto, Ont., Oct. 7-8, 2010. Resolution proposed to be rescinded
Adopted Sept. 11, 2012
Resolution: Extending the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Beyond 2014
Whereas, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River are national treasures and environmental and economic assets of vital importance to the eight Great Lakes states, Ontario, Québec and two nations; and
Whereas, benefits from the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River continue to be threatened by the release of inadequately treated sewage, invasive species, toxic contaminants, deteriorating water infrastructure and inadequately maintained ports and harbors; and
Whereas, priorities established in 2003 by the governors of the eight Great Lakes states provided the foundation on which the region came together to develop the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes, a comprehensive restoration plan that has been broadly endorsed by the Great Lakes governors, states, cities, industries, tribal governments, federal agencies and environmental organizations; and
Whereas, with leadership from the President and bipartisan support from Congress, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) was initiated in 2009 as a five-year program with a budget of $2.2 billion designed to strategically target the most critical problems facing the Great Lakes, including Toxic substances and Areas of Concern Invasive species Nearshore health and nonpoint source pollution Habitat and wildlife protection and restoration Accountability, education, monitoring, evaluation, communication, and partnerships; and
Whereas, the GLRI has established key components for an effective restoration program, including a detailed Action Plan with clear performance goals, an accountability system, and a funding plan that strategically aligns existing programs with those goals; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes region – including states, cities, tribes, business and industry, and nongovernmental groups – have invested significant time and resources to build the capacity to implement the GLRI and translate regional goals into site-specific actions that generate real benefits for local communities; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes states are critical partners in the success of the GLRI with the best knowledge and experience to ensure that resources are targeted at local priorities and several of the Great Lakes states have adopted Great Lakes restoration strategies and plans to complement federal restoration activities in their states; and
Whereas, in July 2012 the Great Lakes Commission presented to U.S. EPA several recommendations based on states’ experiences to improve the effectiveness of the GLRI, and these recommendations include maintaining close coordination and consultation with states; maintaining noncompetitive funding to support state engagement; using a block grant or broad workplan approach to enable large-scale, multi-year grants; and streamlining the RFP, proposal review and quality assurance plan processes; and Resolution proposed to be rescinded
Whereas, funding provided by Congress to date for the GLRI has been below the amount requested by the President and below the amount originally budgeted ($2.2 billion); and
Whereas, the Great Lakes face significant and costly restoration needs, as documented in the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes, which formed the basis for the GLRI and which identified a need for over $20 billion in restoration funding (including investments in wastewater infrastructure); and
Whereas, funding for Great Lakes restoration is a wise investment in the region’s economy that is already generating results and is projected to yield over $50 billion in long-term economic benefits if fully implemented; and
Whereas, ecosystem outcomes from the restoration program likely will not become fully apparent for some years after its implementation; and
Whereas, these and other factors underscore the complexity of implementing a large-scale ecosystem restoration program that utilizes sound science and draws on the full array of programs, authorities and implementation capabilities among federal and state agencies, local jurisdictions and regional organizations.
Therefore, Be It Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission calls on Congress to continue funding for the GLRI beyond 2014 to maintain the momentum underway, build on investments made by the Great Lakes states and other partners, and to facilitate the long-term success of the regional restoration program; and
Be It Further Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission calls on U.S. EPA to develop an extended timeframe for the GLRI that incorporates a careful assessment of the program and modifications to improve its efficiency and effectiveness, including recommendations from the Science Advisory Board report on the GLRI Action Plan and recommendations submitted by the Great Lakes Commission in July 2012, and that this be done in close consultation with the Great Lakes states, the Great Lakes Congressional Delegation, and other regional partners; and
Be It Finally Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission commends U.S. EPA and the other federal agencies for their dedication and hard work in implementing the GLRI and urges continued collaboration with the Great Lakes states to sustain its effectiveness.
Adopted at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, Cleveland, Ohio, September 10-11, 2012.
Resolution proposed to be rescinded
Adopted March 6, 2013
Advancing Phase II of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and Passing Comprehensive Great Lakes Legislation
Whereas, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) was initiated in 2009 as a five-year, $2.2 billion program to implement a comprehensive restoration plan that addresses priorities established by the governors of the eight Great Lakes states and targets the most critical problems facing the Great Lakes, including Toxic substances and Areas of Concern Invasive species Nearshore health and nonpoint source pollution Habitat and wildlife protection and restoration Accountability, education, monitoring, evaluation, communication and partnerships; and
Whereas, the GLRI has established key components for an effective restoration program, including a detailed Action Plan with clear performance goals, an accountability system, and a funding plan that strategically aligns existing programs with those goals; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes region – including states, cities, tribes, business and industry, and nongovernmental groups – have invested significant time and resources to build the capacity to implement the GLRI and translate regional goals into site-specific actions that generate real benefits for local communities; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Commission has presented recommendations for improving the effectiveness of the GLRI based on states’ experiences and an independent Science Advisory Board Review Panel has evaluated the GLRI Action Plan and provided advice to guide future decisions; and
Whereas, funding provided by Congress to date for the GLRI has been below the amount originally projected to ensure its completion ($2.2 billion); and
Whereas, ecosystem outcomes from the restoration program likely will not become fully apparent for some years after its implementation; and
Whereas, these and other factors underscore the complexity of implementing a large-scale ecosystem restoration program that utilizes sound science and draws on the full array of programs, authorities and implementation capabilities among federal and state agencies, local jurisdictions and regional organizations; and
Whereas, congressional action is needed to formally authorize the GLRI and reauthorize several vital existing Great Lakes programs and strengthen coordination with regional stakeholders and binational cooperation with Canada; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Ecosystem Protection Act (GLEPA), comprehensive, bipartisan Great Lakes legislation first introduced in 2012 by the co-chairs of the Senate Great Lakes Task Force, is expected to be reintroduced in the 113th Congress and will formally authorize the GLRI and the Federal Interagency Task Force, reauthorize the Great Lakes Legacy Act, establish a Great Lakes Advisory Board, and call for implementation of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Resolution proposed to be rescinded
Therefore, be It Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission calls on U.S. EPA, along with other federal agencies, to lead development of an extended timeframe for a second phase of the GLRI that incorporates a careful assessment of the program, the development of specific environmental outcomes and metrics to measure progress toward those outcomes, and modifications to improve its efficiency and effectiveness, including consideration of recommendations from the Great Lakes Commission, the U.S. EPA Science Advisory Board, the International Joint Commission, and other partners, and that this be done in close consultation with the Great Lakes states, the Great Lakes Congressional Delegation, and other regional partners; and
Be It Further Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission calls on Congress, with leadership from the Great Lakes Congressional Delegation, to pass comprehensive Great Lakes protection legislation to improve the efficiency of the GLRI, strengthen Great Lakes programs, and facilitate effective long-term management and conservation of the lakes; and
Be it Finally Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission calls on U.S. EPA to use existing advisory bodies, wherever possible, and avoid unnecessary committees, boards and related structures.
Adopted at the 2013 Semiannual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, Washington, D.C., March 5-6.
1300 Victors Way, Suite 1350 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108-5203 Office 734-971-9135 ▪ [email protected]
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Darren J. Nichols
MEMORANDUM
To: Great Lakes Commissioners
From: Victoria Pebbles, Program Director
Re: Great Lakes Energy Water Nexus Resolution
Date: September 27, 2019
Pursuant to the Great Lakes Commission’s policies and procedures, decadal review of Commission resolutions calls that the resolution be either sunsetted or updated.
On September 5, 2019 Commissioners Tim Bruno (PA) Jen Shultz (MN), Loren Wobig (IL), and Alternate Commissioner Steve Galarneau (WI) convened along with Cynthia Frazzini [representing Commissioner Mary Mertz (OH)] to discuss the 2009 resolution: The Water Energy-Nexus: Linking Water and Energy Planning in the Great Lakes. Commission staff, Tom Crane, Deputy Director, and Victoria Pebbles, Program Director, were also on the call.
Commissioners discussed the possibility of updating the 2009 resolution with an added element of “food” or “agriculture” so that the resolution would encompass the nexus among food, energy and water. Commissioners generally agreed that these issues are strongly connected and have implications for the Great Lakes. However, Commissioners but wanted more time to consider relevant Commission and other work on the topic in order to develop a meaningful updated resolution. Specifically, Commissioners wanted to know about: • Findings and recommendations from the GLC-led Great Lakes Water-Energy Nexus Initiative completed in 2011; • Findings and recommendations from an Ohio State University-led and NSF-funded project entitled Impacts of Deglobalization on the Sustainability of Regional Food, Energy, Water Systems; and • Other relevant documents/literature on the topic.
Action 1: Retain the 2009 resolution: The Water Energy-Nexus: Linking Water and Energy Planning in the Great Lakes until the Commission consider a new or updated resolution on the topic.
Action 2: Commissioners with an interest in working on an updated resolution addressing energy-water nexus and/or the food-energy-water nexus are invited to contact Victoria Pebbles by Friday, November 1, 2019. Staff will coordinate Commissioner engagement in crafting a new/updates resolution to be presented at the spring 2020 Great Lakes Commission meeting.
1300 Victors Way, Suite 1350 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108-5203 Office 734-971-9135 ▪ [email protected]
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Darren J. Nichols
MEMORANDUM
To: Great Lakes Commissioners
From: Victoria Pebbles, Program Director
Re: Great Lakes Energy Water Nexus Resolution
Date: September 12, 2019
This memo provides additional background information requested by Commissioners to inform consideration of an updated resolution on the Energy‐Water Nexus. This additional information was requested when a sub‐group of Commissioners convened in September 2019 to consider updating or sunsetting the 2009 resolution: The Water Energy‐Nexus: Linking Water and Energy Planning in the Great Lakes.
The following background resources are offered to inform Commissioner consideration of a new or updated resolution on the energy‐water nexus, or the food‐energy‐water nexus Findings and recommendations from the GLC‐led Great Lakes Water‐Energy Nexus Initiative completed in 2011. Findings and recommendations are in two forms, both titled Integrating Energy and Water Resources Decision Making in the Great Lakes Basin: An Examination of Future Power Generation Scenarios and Water Resource Impacts: o GLEW Synthesis Report; and o Final GLEW Webinar Findings and recommendations from an Ohio State University‐led and NSF‐funded project entitled Impacts of Deglobalization on the Sustainability of Regional Food, Energy, Water Systems; and The project, known as DR‐ FEWS, aims to examine the potential effects of deglobalization on the sustainability of regional food‐ energy‐water systems (FEWS) through development of a new integrated modeling framework that accounts for individual land use and management decisions, regional demands for land, energy and water resources, and water quality and greenhouse gas emissions impacts. The intent is to apply the model to a five‐state Great Lakes region: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin and evaluate the implications of varying future deglobalization scenarios and policies for regional FEWS sustainability and societal well‐being. Alternate Commissioner Steve Galarneau and Program Director Victoria Pebbles both sit on the DR‐FEWS Advisory Committee. The project is expected to conclude in August 2020. Stakeholder Perspectives on the Food‐Energy‐Water Nexus. Frontiers in Environmental Science. Volume 7, Article 7. February 2019. Victoria Pebbles. 2016. University of Michigan guest lecture on the Food, Energy, Water Nexus. Resolution to be retained
Adopted Sept. 30, 2009
Resolution: The Water Energy-Nexus: Linking Water and Energy Planning in the Great Lakes
Whereas, water and energy are inextricably linked; and
Whereas, ensuring clean safe water requires large amounts of energy to supply, purify, distribute, and treat water and wastewater; and
Whereas, approximately 80 percent of municipal costs associated with water processing and distribution are for the energy (electricity) alone; and
Whereas, supplying energy requires large amounts of water and impacts Great Lakes water quality, water quantity and water-dependent natural resources;
Whereas, thermoelectric power plants that burn fossil fuels (e.g., coal, natural gas or petroleum) are the largest source of energy in the Great Lakes, which represented 70 percent of the region’s electric supply in 2006; and accounted for nearly 75 percent of all water use in the Great Lakes basin in 2004, excluding hydropower; and
Whereas, electricity is expected to meet a large portion of the region’s anticipated additional power generation in light of projected long-term demographic shifts and economic growth coupled with the threat of global climate change and mounting pressure for greater U.S. energy security; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region’s vast supply of freshwater makes it particularly attractive for water-intensive energy production and potentially competing demands on Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River water resources; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water Resources Agreement and the Great Lakes- St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact require new and existing water withdrawals to demonstrate efficient use of water resources; and
Whereas, energy planning and water planning are currently done separately, compromising the region’s ability to effectively evaluate and plan for future water and energy needs.
Therefore, be it resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission supports the establishment of new protocols and management models that engage water resources management and energy generation in consultative planning processes; and
Be it further resolved, that Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River state and provincial water resource planning agencies should be consulted early in the planning process to evaluate and make recommendations concerning water use by the energy sector (including, fossil-fuel fired power, nuclear, refining and biofuels plants) to achieve water efficiencies and conservation objectives as envisioned by the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water Resources Agreement and the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact; and
Resolution to be retained
Be it further resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission calls on federal agencies in the United States and Canada, including the U.S. EPA, Department of Interior (USGS) the U.S. Department of Energy, and Environment Canada, Natural Resources Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada to collaborate with each other and consult with the Great Lakes states and provinces concerning energy and water policies; and
Be it finally resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission stands ready to help position the region as a global center for clean water, renewable energy and energy efficient technologies.
Adopted at the 2009 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, Erie, Pa., Sept. 29-30, 2009.
RESOLUTION DRAFT – Oct. 1, 2019
Related to the Public Health Risk from Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) and Regional Action to Bolster Collaboration
Whereas, all Great Lakes residents deserve access to safe drinking water and clean natural resources; and
Whereas, millions of Great Lakes residents rely on public water systems that draw from surface and ground water, and private wells for access to safe, clean drinking water; and
Whereas, PFAS represent a class of thousands of human-made chemicals which are not naturally found in the environment, easily transfer through soil to groundwater, persist indefinitely, and have been shown to be harmful to human health; and
Whereas, PFAS have been detected throughout the Great Lakes Region including in the drinking, ground, and surface water and the tissue and blood of fish and wildlife; and
Whereas, nationwide studies show measurable levels of PFAS in 98 percent of the US population; and
Whereas, exposure to certain PFAS in the environment can lead to adverse human health effects including thyroid disease, decreased fertility, complications in pregnancy, low birth weights, decreased immune response, increased cholesterol, and cancer; and
Whereas, the absence of federal enforceable regulatory standards, including drinking water standards relating to PFAS contamination demands an immediate, proactive, and unified response from the executive, state agencies, and the legislature to protect public health and state natural resources; and
Whereas, a collaborative approach is needed to assess potential hazards, share data, identify best practices, establish uniform enforceable standards, and leverage funding sources.
Therefore, be it resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission calls for the member states and provinces to bolster intra- and interstate collaboration and partnership to address the emerging risks posed by PFAS, by taking action to accomplish the following:
I. Foster collaboration with municipalities and wastewater treatment plants on screening programs to identify potential sources of PFAS into the environment; II. Expand monitoring and consideration of PFAS in the development of fish and other wildlife consumption advisories to protect human health; III. Explore regulatory standards that are developed to protect public health and the environment from PFAS contamination; IV. Discuss mechanisms to effectively inform, educate, and engage the public about PFAS;
Presented for consideration at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, October 9-11, Quebec City, Quebec.
1 of 2
V. Collaborate regionally to identify and prioritize likely known PFAS sources and incorporate this information into the PFAS action plan; VI. Support ongoing evaluation of public health risks of PFAS in addition to any impacts to the Great Lakes natural resources, agriculture, wildlife, and fisheries; VII. Promote the developments best practices and protocols for identifying PFAS sources to ensure that the materials are managed in a way that protects natural resources and human health. VIII. Encourage partnership with stakeholders, develop standard testing and treatment protocols that are both cost-efficient and effective; IX. Engage academic institutions and experts to identify and collaborate on joint projects, and further identify technical resources necessary to implement a PFAS action plan; X. Explore avenues of funding for the regional entities, state and provincial governments, local governments, and private parties to aid their effort to address PFAS.
Be it Further Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission urges the United States Environmental Protection Agency to expeditiously implement their PFAS Action Plan and engage in binational collaboration with Environment Canada and Canadians Provinces to include them in their efforts to share information and build stronger partnership on this issue; and
Be It Finally Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission calls on the federal governments of the United States and Canada to expedite risk communications, site assessments, remediation, treatment and prevention of PFAS contamination, and assume costs associated with these efforts for contamination that arises on and from federal properties.
2 of 2 Existing resolution - for reference purposes only
RESOLUTION Adopted September 20, 2017
Addressing Contaminants of Emerging Concern in the Great Lakes Basin
Whereas, the waters of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River provide a multitude of ecological, social and economic benefits for approximately 40 million Canadian and U.S. residents; and
Whereas, the term “Contaminants of Emerging Concern” (CECs) refers to a wide variety of compounds that are present in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence river basin1 that are not widely or consistently regulated, such as Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs), Perfluorinated Compounds (PFCs) pharmaceuticals, 1,4-Dioxane, and microplastic; and
Whereas, PBDEs are used as flame retardants in many common consumer products, PFCs are used as firefighting foams and in non-stick cookware, pharmaceuticals typically enter waterways via improper disposal of unused medicines and excretion into waste streams, 1,4-Dioxane is found in a variety of products from paint strippers and varnishes, to deodorant and shampoo, and microplastics in the environment are derived from a myriad of sources including pellets from the manufacturing industry, microfibers shed from clothing, and as a component of commercial and recreational waste streams; and
Whereas, the lack of a standard definition for CECs across international boundaries and an inconsistent regulatory environment at the state, provincial, and federal levels creates difficulty in addressing the threat that they pose; and
Whereas, there is a high level of uncertainty regarding the potential human health and ecological risks associated with both known CECs and CECs that are yet-unidentified but may be present in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence river basin; and
Whereas, wastewater treatment plants in the U.S. and Canada discharge 4.8 billion gallons of treated effluent into the Great Lakes basin every day, and these wastewater treatment plants are only equipped to remove approximately half2 of the chemicals that have been identified in sewage; and
Whereas, some CECs, including PBDEs and some PFCs (PFOA and PFOS), are considered Chemicals of Mutual Concern (CMCs) under Annex 3 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) while others, such as microplastics, various pharmaceuticals, and 1,4-Dioxane, are not part of that effort; and
Whereas, CECs come in many forms, and microplastics are an example of a CEC that is present in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence river basin that is not found as an aqueous solution, but as tiny solid fragments of larger broken- down materials; and
1 2011. University of Windsor Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and International Joint Commission. Chemicals of Emerging Concern in the Great Lakes Region. Retrieved from: http://www.ijc.org/php/publications/pdf/ID696.pdf 2 2013. International Joint Commission. More on IJC’s Great Lakes Wastewater Treatment Study Removing Chemicals of Emerging Concern. Retrieved from: http://www.ijc.org/en_/blog/2013/12/11/more_on_IJC_great_lakes_wastewater_treatment_study_cecs/
1 of 2 Existing resolution - for reference purposes only
Whereas, while multiple discrete efforts are underway to better understand and address the impacts of some individual CECs, an effort to look more holistically at CECs and their cumulative risks to the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence river basin economy and environment would inform the Great Lakes Commission’s ability to respond appropriately on the issue of CECs.
Therefore, be it resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission (GLC) recognizes that advancing the understanding of the harmful impacts of CECs and taking precautionary steps to impede their further introduction, spread, and accumulation via all known pathways is critical to protecting the economic and ecological well-being of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River region; and
Therefore, be it resolved, that the GLC supports using a science-based process to assess risks and to develop binational strategies to take action on CECs that have been listed as CMCs under Annex 3 of the GLWQA, and calls for the expansion of this list to include pharmaceuticals, microplastics, and 1,4-Dioxane; and
Therefore, be it resolved, that the GLC applauds the federal actions of the U.S. and Canadian governments geared towards banning the use of microbeads in rinse-off cosmetic products, and urges the U.S. EPA and Environment Canada to implement the recommendation put forth by the International Joint Commission (IJC) to develop a binational plan to prevent microplastics from other known sources from entering the Great Lakes using a combination of science and research, policy, market-based instruments, and education and outreach; and
Therefore, be it finally resolved, that the GLC requests that government agencies as well as research institutions: 1) assess whether existing plans, programs and policies are adequate to identify and mitigate the risks posed by CECs and protect the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River basin and its residents from those risks; and 2) recommend additional efforts including targeted areas of research and the development of policies, technologies, and safer alternative compounds that might be needed to address current and future CECs in the Great Lakes basin.
Adopted at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, September 19-20, 2017 in Duluth, Minnesota. The resolution was passed unanimously.
2 of 2
RESOLUTION DRAFT – September 30, 2019
Great Lakes Commission Commitment to Implement Blue Accounting Principles
Whereas, the Great Lakes Basin Compact established the Great Lakes Commission, an interstate compact agency, to “promote the orderly, integrated, and comprehensive development, use and conservation of the water resources of the Great Lakes Basin”; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Basin Compact further calls on the Great Lakes Commission to “collect, correlate, interpret and report on data relating to the water resources of the GL Basin” (Article VI, Section A); and
Whereas, the GLC was the founder of and manager of the Great Lakes Information Network (“GLIN”) that began in the early 1990s and served for more than two decades as a Great Lakes regional information hub; and
Whereas, the collectively recognized need for a coordinated system of data, information and knowledge to support Great Lakes water resource management decisions was the catalyst for Blue Accounting as first articulated in the 2014 report: “Great Lakes Blue Accounting: Empowering Decisions to Realize Regional Water Values”; and
Whereas, in 2014 the Great Lakes Commission initiated Blue Accounting through its 2014 resolution “Establishing Blue Accounting: A collaborative re-engineering of Great Lakes information strategy and delivery” which called on “regional collaborators and funders to help by openly sharing data in order to lead to smarter information systems and knowledge to support decisions by individuals, governments and corporations to correct mistakes, prevent future problems, and maximize the environmental, economic and social benefits that our water resources provide” and
Whereas, since May 1, 2015 the GLC and The Nature Conservancy have been working jointly to develop Blue Accounting to provide cutting-edge information services about the Great Lakes previously unavailable in one place; and
Whereas, Blue Accounting via blueaccounting.org was publicly launched October 2017 at the Leadership Summit of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers as a resource to support Great Lakes communities and help Great Lakes leaders collaboratively, effectively and holistically steward the world’s largest freshwater ecosystem; and
Whereas, Blue Accounting has engaged regional groups to set consensus-based goals and measure progress on five key Great Lakes issues: aquatic invasive species; coastal wetlands; maritime transportation; phosphorus reductions; and source water protection; and
Whereas, The GLC and The Nature Conservancy have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to guide transition of management and governance of Blue Accounting to the Great Lakes Commission by the end of 2019; and
Presented for adoption at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, October 9-11, in Quebec City, QC.
Whereas, the principles of Blue Accounting as stated in the 2019-2023 Blue Accounting Business Plan are: • Outcome-based and goal-driven • Issue-based • Metric and data-informed • Decision-enabling • Collaborative • Adaptive; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Commission is empowered by the Great Lakes Basin Compact and is uniquely suited to manage and govern the Blue Accounting initiative and establish the initiative as an essential asset of the Great Lakes community that delivers timely relevant and reliable information that can enable strategic investments to achieve priority Great Lakes water resource outcomes.
Therefore, Be It Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission will serve as the governing and managing agency responsible for hosting and implementing Blue Accounting; and
Be it Further Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission will collaborate with partners to continue to implement Blue Accounting, guided by the Business Plan; and
Be It Further Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission calls again on regional partners and funders to help by collaborating to openly share data and information to enhance the Basin’s collective ability and accountability to measure progress toward achieving shared goals; and
Be It Finally Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission’s Board of Directors agrees to serve as, or to appoint a committee of its membership on or before December 31, 2019 to serve as the recognized decision making body and to work with the Blue Accounting Advisory Committee to implement Blue Accounting and its Principles as an integral component of collaborative decision making across the Great Lakes Basin and within the Great Lakes Commission in its implementation of the Great Lakes Basin Compact.
For reference only; resolution to be retained
Adopted Sept. 30, 2014
Establishing Blue Accounting: A collaborative re-engineering of Great Lakes information strategy and delivery
Whereas, the water resources of the Great Lakes region support a vibrant economy, exceptional ecosystem and rich quality of life; and
Whereas, for the region to continue to realize its competitive edge in North America and globally, the true value of water must be realized – and then sustained – through strategic investments to achieve priority water resource outcomes; and
Whereas, strategic development and delivery of information and knowledge will play a key role in our understanding and claiming of regional water values; and
Whereas, for decades we have monitored aspects of the Great Lakes water system itself (stream flow, and stream and lake water quality) but we do not have a coordinated system of data, information and knowledge to support decisions; and
Whereas, critical concepts and technologies supporting the linkage between information systems and decisionmaking across large regions have also been developing in the Great Lakes region, including the Great Lakes Aquatic Habitat Framework, Great Lakes Observing System and the Great Lakes Information Management and Delivery System; and
Whereas, better accounting of our municipal water resources could have provided vital information to anticipate or prevent and, subsequently, assist with response efforts related to the recent drinking water crisis in Toledo, Ohio (Aug. 2-4, 2014) caused by the toxin microcystin breaching water intakes due to the persistence of harmful algal blooms in western Lake Erie; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Commission is charged by the region’s governors and premiers to “promote the orderly, integrated, and comprehensive development, use and conservation of the water resources of the Great Lakes basin” and created and manages the Great Lakes Information Network, the only online clearinghouse of its kind serving the region; and
Whereas, in 2013 the Great Lakes governors and premier of Ontario charged the Great Lakes Commission to provide recommendations on a comprehensive and effective vision for regional water monitoring and reporting; and
Whereas, with guidance from a collaborative workgroup, the Great Lakes Commission provided this vision in the report, Great Lakes Blue Accounting: Empowering Decisions to Realize Regional Water Values, in March 2014; and
Whereas, the Blue Accounting report lays out a strategy for revolutionizing the way information about water resources is designed, organized, managed, delivered, financed and governed in the Great Lakes region; and
For reference only; resolution to be retained
Whereas, the Blue Accounting vision provides a tactical opportunity to re-engineer GLIN, both strategically and structurally, and enhance its capacity as the information hub for the entire Great Lakes community; and
Whereas, the governors and premiers provided enthusiastic feedback to the Blue Accounting plan in April 2014 and encouraged the Great Lakes Commission and its collaborators to move forward with its implementation.
Therefore, Be It Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission will collaborate with partners to begin refining and implementing the Blue Accounting framework including acquiring additional resources in-house and with partners; and
Be it Further Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission will help to catalyze implementation of the Blue Accounting initiative, redesign of GLIN, and establishment of a progressive framework for greatly improved orderly, integrated and comprehensive information systems in support of basin-level water resources management; and
Be It Further Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission calls on regional information providers to join with the Commission in helping to clarify and harmonize the roles of the primary, regional data/information portals; and
Be It Further Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission urges partners to work collaboratively to conduct one or more pilots of the Blue Accounting framework; one around municipal water services (safe drinking water, runoff and waste treatment) and that factors leading to the Toledo water crisis be used to guide planning in the development of the pilot; and others within the desired outcomes of healthy aquatic ecosystems; and
Be it Finally Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission calls on regional collaborators and funders to help by openly sharing data in order to lead to smarter information systems and knowledge to support decisions by individuals, governments and corporations to correct mistakes, prevent future problems, and maximize the environmental, economic and social benefits that our water resources provide.
Adopted at the 2014 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, Sept. 30 in Buffalo, N.Y.
RESOLUTION DRAFT – Sept. 30, 2019
Recognizing the Value of Commercial Shipping on the Illinois Maritime Transportation System
Whereas, the Illinois Maritime Transportation System encompasses 1,118 miles of navigable inland waterways, 27 lock and dam facilities, 19 Public Port Districts, and more than 350 private terminals; and
Whereas, this waterway system provides the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway states and provinces with connections to Illinois River ports, Mississippi River ports, and the Gulf of Mexico, and provides the mid-section of the nation with connections to Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway ports and the Atlantic Ocean (through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway); and
Whereas, maritime transportation offers significant economic and environmental advantages, with one, 15-barge tow equivalent to 216 rail cars and 1,050 tractor-trailers, and one gallon of fuel able to move a ton of cargo 616 miles by water, versus 478 miles by rail and 150 miles by truck; and
Whereas, the U.S. Department of Transportation predicts that during the next three decades, national and global population growth will significantly increase the volume of containerized cargo and truck freight that will need to move throughout the U.S.; and
Whereas, new transportation options, including container on barge (COB) and container on vessel (COV) services, may maximize the inland waterway’s underutilized capacity while taking advantage of the expanded Panama Canal; and
Whereas, new marine vessels under development present the potential to change dramatically the economics of containerized shipping along the inland waterway system as a container on vessel approach, with single COV vessels able to carry up to 2,500 containers; and
Whereas, current proposals envision transporting containers with high-value dry goods and products upriver and into the Great Lakes and a mixture of containers containing agricultural products or dry goods and commodities, as well as empty containers, back to the mid-section of the nation and/or the Gulf of Mexico, offering a new modal alternative and new paradigm for shippers to work more closely with marine transportation to more profitably access global markets while being cognizant of aquatic invasive species challenges and deterrent technology impacts; and
Whereas, water transport is safer, on a million-ton-mile basis there are 21.9 rail fatalities and 79.3 truck fatalities for every one fatality on the waterways system.
Therefore, Be It Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission recognizes the economic importance and potential expanded value of the Illinois Maritime Transportation System to the Great Lakes Basin and both the U.S. and Canadian economies, and recognizes the significance of proposed improvements to the system to the Great Lakes states and provinces; and
Be It finally Resolved, the Great Lakes Commission recognizes and supports Illinois’ leadership in studying and recommending improvements to strengthen and expand maritime commerce, including through the Illinois Marine Transportation System Plan currently under development.
Presented for consideration at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, October 9-11, Quebec City, Quebec.
RESOLUTION DRAFT – Oct. 1, 2019
Acknowledging the Risks of Climate Change and Advancing Regional Resilience
Whereas, the Great Lakes region is home to 100 million people, sustains a $6 trillion economy, and houses over 84% of North America’s supply of surface freshwater; and
Whereas, the economic prosperity and wellbeing of those living in the Great Lakes region is inextricably tied to the health and vitality of our shared waters and natural resources; and
Whereas, the scientific consensus presents overwhelming evidence that human-driven climate change, marked by an unusual rate and intensity of change over time, is real and presents significant risks and challenges; the Fourth National Climate Assessment concluded that the past decade was the warmest in recorded history for the United States and the dominant cause is human-produced greenhouse gas emissions;i’ii and
Whereas, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), June through August of 2019 was the hottest meteorological summer on record for the Northern Hemisphere, tied with 2016;iii and
Whereas, the NOAA’s Climate Resilience Toolkit, as well as the latest interagency National Climate Assessment, project significant temperature growth, with scenarios projecting warming of 5.5-6.5°F (3.1-3.6°C; lower emissions scenario) to 7.5°F-9.5°F (4.2-5.2°C higher emissions scenario) over the next century;iv and
Whereas, average annual precipitation has risen over the past few decades and these trends are expected to continue. In particular, the frequency and intensity of extreme precipitation events throughout the Great Lakes region are projected to increase markedly;v and
Whereas, under current emission scenarios and business-as-usual, the fourth National Climate Assessment notes that “climate change is expected to cause growing losses to American infrastructure and property and impede the rate of economic growth over this century;”vi and
Whereas, the impacts of climate change, such as increasing heat and flooding, applies additional wear and stress on aging and already deteriorating infrastructure, further reducing the lifespan or performance of our region’s infrastructure, imposing a cost on the public and threatening the economy;vii and
Whereas, the Great Lakes region’s energy infrastructure, which remains increasingly important for telecommunications, transportation, and other technological systems, and which underpins the continued success of our regional economy, is at risk due to growing climate instability and more frequent extreme weather events;viii and
Whereas, increasing temperatures exacerbate the prevalence of invasive species, pests, and diseases, from emerald ash borer to various bacterial plant diseases, which damage forests, the forestry industry, and crop farmers; and
Whereas, warming temperatures and increased frequency and intensity of extreme precipitation events will continue to harm the Great Lakes region’s agricultural industry through increased vapor pressure deficit’s (VPD), drying plants and soils, compounded by more severe soil erosion and crop disease;ix and
Presented for consideration at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, October 9-11, Quebec City, Quebec.
1 of 3 Whereas, Great Lakes surface temperatures have increased at some of the greatest rates worldwidex, with the most rapid increases occurring in the summer and greatly exceeding air temperature trendsxi, especially in the eastern basin of Lake Superiorxii. Lake surface temperatures could rise by as much as 7°F by 2050 and over 12°F by the end of the 21st centuryxiii; and
Whereas, climate change has and will continue to harm wildlife and fisheries throughout the Great Lakes region, exacerbating the pervasiveness of invasive species, algal blooms, and exacerbating changes in the range and distribution of certain species; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes ecosystem, its native species and biodiversity, provide important ecological services such as flood control, water purification, and crop pollination; and
Whereas, Native and First Nations of the Great Lakes region, the original stewards of this region’s land and water, are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change due to their subsistent, economic and cultural relationship with threatened natural resources; and
Whereas, the effects of climate change are not distributed equally, and the impacts of climate change are already being felt disproportionately in communities across the Great Lakes region; frontline communities, such as people of color, and vulnerable populations, such as aging or lower-income individuals, will experience greater impacts;xiv and
Whereas, climate change poses significant risks to public health, Increased heat wave intensity and frequency, degraded air and water quality, and increases in vector-borne illnesses all pose substantial risks to public health. Health risks are particularly heightened for vulnerable populations like infants, pregnant women, and older adults, and are predicted to increase already existing disparities in certain health outcomes;xv and
Whereas, without resiliency efforts and the deployment of adaptation strategies, ongoing, unabated climate change presents significant concerns regarding the common protection and promotion of the Great Lakes region and its shared waters, natural resources, and economy; and
Whereas, holistically addressing climate change and promoting economic growth are not mutually exclusive, and reducing the risks and costs associated with climate change, as well as promoting innovative and new industry, will bolster sustainable economic prosperity; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Commission, as noted in the founding charter, serves as a convening of American states and Canadian provinces and an intergovernmental agency charged with:
I. Promoting the orderly, integrated, and comprehensive development, use, and conservation of the water resources of the Great Lakes Basin; II. Planning for the welfare and development of the water resources of the Basin as a whole as well as for those portions of the Basin which may have problems of special concern; and III. Advising in securing and maintaining a proper balance among industrial, commercial, agricultural, water supply, residential, recreational, and other legitimate uses of the water resources of the Basin; and Whereas, in accordance with the strategic plan adopted by the Great Lakes Commission in 2017, the Commission seeks to serve as a “binational leader and a trusted voice ensuring the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River support a healthy environment, vibrant economy, and high quality of life for current and future generations.”
Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission acknowledges the global crisis of climate change and the risks that ongoing climate change poses to the ecological and economic health of the Great Lakes region, as well as the wellbeing of Great Lakes communities throughout the region, now, and for all future generations; and
Be It Further Resolved, in order to address climate change and its impact on the Great Lakes region, the Great Lakes Commission shall:
2 of 3
I. Work with member states and provinces, federal agencies, and regional stakeholders to assess current and potential economic and social costs associated with current conditions and various future emission and climate scenarios; II. Create a working group to evaluate how the Great Lakes Commission can advance resilience efforts throughout the region and reduce risks to Great Lakes communities, the regional economy, and our shared natural resources; III. Incorporate data and analyses related to the various effects of climate change within the Great Lakes Commission’s Blue Accounting Initiative; and Be It Further Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission calls on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River states and provinces to pursue efforts to build collective resilience and deploy adaptation strategies to cope with and reduce risks associated with the current and future impacts of climate change; and
Be It Finally Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission calls on the federal governments of the United States and Canada to acknowledge, or continue to acknowledge, the existing threat of climate change and take action to address the various risks posed to the Great Lakes region and beyond.
Sources U.S. Global Change Research Program: 4th National Climate Assessment Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: November 2014 Report National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit
i https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full.pdf ii https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ iii https://www.noaa.gov/news/summer-2019-was-hottest-on-record-for-northern-hemisphere iv https://toolkit.climate.gov/regions/great-lakes#Temperature v https://science2017.globalchange.gov/ vi https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ vii https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/11/ https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/12/ viii https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/4/ ix https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/10/ x O’Reilly, CM et al. Rapid and highly variable warming of lake surface waters around the globe. Geophys. Res Lett. 42, 10773- 10781(2015) xi Austin, J & Colman, S. A century of temperature variability in Lake Superior. Limnol. Oceanogr. 53, 2724-2730 (2008). xii Mason, LA et al. Fine-scale spatial variation in ice cover and surface temperature trends across the surface of the Laurentian Great Lakes. Climatic Change 138, 71-83 (2016). xiii Mackey S. 2012: Great Lakes Nearshore and Coastal Systems. US National Climate Assessment Midwest Technical Input Report. J. Winkler, J Andresen, J. Hatfield, D. Bidwell, and D. Brown, Eds., Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments (GLISA), National Laboratory for Agriculture and the Environment, 14. xiv https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ xv https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/14/
3 of 3
DRAFT RESOLUTION Presented for Adoption October 10, 2019
Celebrating the 20th Anniversary of Québec and Ontario’s Declaration of Partnership with the Great Lakes Commission
Whereas, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River Basin contains one of the world’s greatest water resources; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Basin is a binational North American resource that compels cooperative stewardship to protect the health of the ecosystem, economy and communities that thrive in and around the Basin; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes states entered into a formal agreement under the Great Lakes Basin Compact of 1955 to work together to protect, restore, and steward the Basin; and
Whereas, Québec and Ontario signed the Declaration of Partnership with the Great Lakes Commission in 1999, becoming Associate Members; and
Whereas, the Declaration of Partnership envisions collaboration among the Canadian provinces of Québec and Ontario and the eight Great Lakes States; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Commission has become a leader and a trusted voice ensuring the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River support a healthy environment, a vibrant economy and a high quality of life for current and future generations; and
Whereas, the Great Lakes Commission represents, advises and assists the party states and provinces by fostering dialogue, developing consensus, facilitating collaboration and speaking with a unified voice to advance collective interests and responsibilities to promote economic prosperity and environmental protection and to achieve a balanced and sustainable use of Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River Basin water resources; and
Whereas, the provinces of Ontario and Québec and the Great Lakes states remain committed to work together in binational cooperation under the terms of the Declaration of Partnership;
Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission commends and celebrates 20 years of outstanding cooperation, work and achievement in support of Québec and Ontario’s participation in the Great Lakes Commission; and
Therefore, Be It Finally Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission and its members recognize, celebrate and commit to continuing their work together to accomplish the goals of “a healthy environment, strong economy and high quality of life for all Basin residents” as outlined in the Declaration of Partnership.
Adopted at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Commission, October 9-11, 2019 in Quebec City, Quebec. The resolution was passed unanimously.
1 of 1
Therefore, Be It Further Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission commends and celebrates 20 years of outstanding cooperation, work and achievement in support of Ontario’s participation in the Great Lakes Commission; and
Therefore, Be It Finally Resolved, that the Great Lakes Commission members recognize, celebrate and commit to continuing their work together to accomplish the purposes of the Great Lakes Basin Compact.
International Joint Commission- Background Material
Contents
1. A brief overview of the International Joint Commission (IJC) 2. The IJC Commissioners: Profiles 3. Plan2012 Fact Sheet 4. Plan2014 Fact Sheet 5. Ballast water Regulation Crosswalk 6. IJC Update on Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Water Levels 7. IJC Activities and Transboundary Map (Hard copies will be provided at the meeting)
International Joint Commission: Watching Over our Transboundary Waters from Coast to Coast
Cooperating on shared waters
Cooperation is vital for the use and management of shared waters along the common boundary of Canada and the United States. The Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 provides principles for using the waters shared by Canada and the United States. It also created the International Joint Commission (IJC) to help prevent and resolve water- resource and environmental disputes between the two countries through processes that seek the common interests of both.
Under the treaty, the federal governments of the United States and Canada must consent to any project that changes the natural levels or flows of boundary waters. Project proponents may make an application and seek IJC approval for the project, or the two governments may reach a separate agreement. The treaty also allows the governments to refer issues of concern along the boundary to the IJC for investigation and report. IJC reports under these references are advisory and not binding on the governments.
Taking a binational approach
The IJC is an autonomous international organization created by treaty. The IJC has six Commissioners. Three are appointed by the President of the United States, with the advice and consent of the Senate, and three are appointed by the ministers of the Canadian Cabinet on the advice of the Prime Minister. The Commissioners work to achieve consensus on solutions that are in the best interests of both countries. They are independent and operate without negotiating instructions from their respective governments. The IJC has established more than 20 boards and task forces to help carry out its responsibilities along the boundary from coast to coast. Joint fact-finding is essential to IJC board work as it builds a foundation of sound science for reaching consensus on appropriate actions. Board and task force members are drawn equally from both countries and are expected to work in their personal and professional capacities, not as representatives of an organization or region.
Overseeing efforts to protect water quality
In the Boundary Waters Treaty, Canada and the United States agreed that neither country will pollute boundary waters, and waters that flow across the boundary, to an extent that would cause injury to health or property in the other country. When asked by governments, the International Joint Commission investigates, monitors and recommends actions regarding the quality of water in lakes and rivers along the Canada-United States border. The IJC has water quality responsibilities in the St. Croix River, the Great Lakes, the Rainy River and the Red River.
Reporting on Great Lakes Water Quality
A major responsibility of the IJC is to evaluate progress toward restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes basin ecosystem. In 1972, the United States and Canada signed the first Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and set goals to clean up waste waters from industries and communities. In 1978, the countries signed a new agreement that also committed them to rid the Great Lakes of persistent toxic substances. These substances remain in the environment for a long time and can injure the health of animals and people. Amendments to the 1978 agreement established a process for restoring contaminated Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River, and eliminating critical pollutants through Lakewide Management Plans. Every two years, the IJC issues a comprehensive report assessing progress and advising the governments on how to meet the goals of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. The agreement established a Great Lakes Regional Office to assist the IJC in this process.
Managing water levels and flows
Changing water levels can affect drinking water intakes, commercial shipping, hydroelectric power generation, agriculture, shoreline property, recreation, fisheries, wildlife, wetlands and other interests. When it approves a project, the IJC sets requirements for managing the flows in order to protect the interests of both countries. Projects approved by the IJC include hydroelectric power projects in the St. Croix River, Great Lakes, St. Lawrence River and Columbia River basins. The IJC also has responsibilities regarding emergency water levels in the Lake of the Woods basin, and water apportionment in the Souris River, St. Mary River and Milk River basins.
Responding to changing needs
Some of the projects approved by the IJC are now more than 80 years old. Over the years, use of the waters has changed, including increased recreational use, and more is known about the watersheds and the environmental impacts of the projects. The IJC is systematically reviewing its requirements for managing water flows through these projects to account for these changes while insuring that the terms of the Boundary Waters Treaty continue to be met.
Advising on air quality issues
The United States and Canadian governments have asked the IJC to bring to their attention, or to investigate, air pollution problems in boundary regions. Air pollution can travel thousands of miles and settle on land or in water far away from the source of the pollution. When air pollutants fall on rivers or lakes they can affect the quality of the water. In 1991, the two governments signed the Canada-United States Air Quality Agreement and set up an Air Quality Committee to report every two years on progress. The International Joint Commission has been asked to invite comments on the Committee’s reports from individuals and groups and to prepare a summary report of the views expressed.
The Ecosystem Approach
Every part of an ecosystem — the air and land, the lakes, rivers and streams, plant life, wildlife and humans — depends on the other parts for its own health. No single group or organization in our society can restore health and balance to the ecosystem, so we must all work together to find solutions to problems and to protect the ecosystems in which we live. .org To take an ecosystem approach to its responsibilities, the IJC has begun to combine boards that once had separate responsibilities in various transboundary watersheds. Under the International Watersheds Initiative, the Commission is working to strengthen the capacity of existing boards through,
. employing a broader, ecosystem perspective; . expanding outreach and cooperation among organizations with local water- related interests and responsibilities; . promoting the development of a common vision for each basin; . developing a better understanding of the water-related resources; and . creating conditions for the resolution of specific watershed-related issues.
Find out more and become involved
The IJC publishes reports on the progress made and the challenges that remain in restoring and protecting the waters along the Canada-U.S. boundary. It also seeks to involve the public in its investigations through public meetings, roundtables, comment periods and other forms of discussion.
For more information, Visit our website at www.ijc.org, Contact an IJC office.
Canadian Section Great Lakes Regional Office United States Section 234 Laurier Avenue West 100 Ouellette Avenue 1717 H Street NW 22nd Floor, Ottawa, ON K1P 6K6 8th Floor, Windsor, ON N9A 6T3 Suite 835, Washington, DC 20006 Canada Canada U.S.A. Telephone: (613) 995-2984 Telephone: (519) 257-6700 Telephone: (202) 736-9000 Fax: (613) 993-5583 Fax: (519) 257-6740 Fax: (202) 632-2006
IJC Commissioners
Pierre Beland Jane Corwin Canadian Commissioner-Chair United States Commissioner-Chair
Henry Lickers Robert Sission Canadian Commissioner United States Commissioner
Merrell Ann-Phare Lance Yohe Canadian Commissioner United States Commissioner Pierre Beland, Canadian Chair & Commissioner
Pierre Béland is a scientist in environmental biology and toxicology, best known as an expert on the conservation of beluga whales. He was a founder and research scientist with the St. Lawrence National Institute of Ecotoxicology, an NGO dedicated to research and education on toxic compounds in estuarine ecosystems. Dr. Béland has published three books, numerous scientific and popular articles, has hosted a TV series on the environment, and participated in several documentary films. He served for ten years as a Commissioner for BAPE, the Quebec environmental assessment Board. He has chaired public hearings for various agencies such as Parks Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Quebec Energy Efficiency Agency, Telus. Previously he headed the Fisheries Ecology Research Center with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and was a paleoecologist with the National Museum of Nature. From Sept 1995 to Sept 1998, Dr. Béland was one of three Canadian Commissioners (and Acting Chair) with the International Joint Commission. Until recently he owned and managed a company manufacturing equipment for research and management of aquatic and marine ecosystems. His most recent duties were as a Director of AquaForum, whose AquaHacking Challenge is a Canada-wide competition for graduate students and innovators aiming to create start-ups in the field of water technology and the blue economy. Dr. Béland holds a BA and a BSc from Laval University (Quebec City), and a PhD from Dalhousie University (Halifax). He was a Post-Doctoral Fellow at ORSTOM Centre, New Caledonia, and at the University of Queensland, Australia. He resides in Montreal, QC; he is fluent in French and English and proficient in Mandarin. Henry Lickers- Canadian Commissioner Henry Lickers, a Haudenosaunee citizen of the Seneca Nation, Turtle Clan. He has been Director of the Mohawk Council for 32 years and is now the Environmental Science Officer, for the past six years. Throughout his career, Mr. Lickers has been instrumental in incorporating First Nation’s people and knowledge into environmental planning and decision making. Prior to his appointment as IJC Commissioner, Mr. Lickers was a member of the IJC's current Great Lakes Science Advisory Board (SAB) since 2014. Mr. Lickers also served as a SAB member from 1987- 91 and 1997-2000. He has been principle investigator on the EAGLE (Effect on Aboriginal in the Great Lakes Environment) Project and the Naturalized Knowledge Systems Project and the First Nations’ Community Health Indicators Project. Henry has been Director Ontario Professional Foresters Association, Scientific Co-Chair of The Haudenosaunee Environmental Taskforce, Vice President of the Board of Directors, St. Lawrence River Institute of Environmental Sciences and a member of the Board of Directors for the Eastern Ontario Model Forest. The recipient of a number of awards recognizing his lifelong service to the St. Lawrence River, and service to many environmental and government organizations over his career, Mr. Lickers was given an Honorary Doctor of Science Degree from the State University of New York Syracuse. He holds a Bachelor of Science (Biology and Geography) and undertook graduate studies at the University of Waikato in New Zealand, and was a Trent University Ph D. Elder Council member. He resides in Akwesasne, Ontario.
Merrell-Ann Phare- Canadian Commissioner Merrell-Ann Phare is a lawyer, writer, strategist, negotiator and relationship-builder who worked extensively in and with indigenous organizations on environmental, land, water, rights and governance issues. She, along with 10 First Nation Chiefs, was the founding Executive Director of the Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources (CIER), a national First Nation charitable environmental organisation. As Chief Negotiator for the Government of the Northwest Territories, Ms. Phare lead the negotiation of transboundary water agreements in the Mackenzie River Basin and the creation of Thaidene Nene, a national and territorial park in the east arm of Great Slave Lake. She is the author of the book “Denying the Source: the Crisis of First Nations Water Rights” and co- author of “Ethical Water”. She is a member of the Forum for Leadership on Water, Smart Prosperity's Leadership Council, and is a recipient of Canada's Clean 50 Award. She served as legal counsel and advisor to a number of First Nation and Metis governments and organizations. Ms. Phare holds a Bachelor of Arts in Economics (Environmental) Bachelor of Laws, Master of Law (Aboriginal Water Rights and International Trade Law) from the University of Manitoba a Master of Fine Arts (Creative Writing) from University of British Columbia. She resides in Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Jane Corwin – US Commissioner
Jane Corwin served as a member of the New York State Assembly from 2009 through 2016, where she was the Minority Leader Pro Tempore and the ranking member of the Corporations, Authorities and Commissions Committee. Additionally, she was a member of the Environmental Conservation, Education and Mental Health Committees. Ms. Corwin has also served as president of the Philip M. and Jane Lewis Corwin Foundation since 2005, and was the director of Gibraltar Industries out of Buffalo from 2014-2018. She succeeds former US Co-Chair Lana Pollack, who served from 2010 to 2019.
Robert Sission - US Commissioner
Robert Sisson has been involved with the environmental organization ConservAmerica since 2006, where he has served as president since 2011, and more recently was appointed by Michigan Governor Rick Snyder to the state’s Environmental Justice Working Group in 2017. Mr. Sisson has also been involved in the government of the Michigan city of Sturgis, where he has served as mayor from 2005-2007 and as a city commissioner from 2003-2008 and again from 2011-2016. Concurrently, he was a member of the boards of directors for both the Sturgis Economic Development Corporation and the St. Joseph County Economic Development Corporation. He succeeds former US Commissioner Dereth Glance, who served from 2011 to 2016. Lance Yohe- US Commissioner
Lance Yohe has been previously involved in Canada-U.S. transboundary organizations centered in the Red River basin for over 25 years, serving as the executive director of the Red River Basin Commission in Fargo, North Dakota from its formation in 2002 until 2014. He was involved with its two predecessors, the Red River Basin Board and International Coalition for Land and Water Stewardship. He also served as a manager with the Southeast Cass Water Resources Board and as a member of the Red River Joint Water Resources Board’s Executive Board of Managers. In 2014, Mr. Yohe formed Trans Boundary Solutions, a consulting firm working with regional clients on both sides of the boundary, including the Prairie Improvement Network and the Assiniboine River Basin Initiative. He succeeds former US Commissioner Rich Moy, who served from 2011 to 2019.The International Joint Commission prevents and resolves disputes between the United States of America and Canada under the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty and pursues the common good of both countries as an independent and objective advisor to the two governments. US and Canadian Commissioners work together to play a binational oversight role, in matters involving water quality and quantity issues on the topics and in the basins where the governments have requested the IJC’s assistance.