Lake Michigan

2021 Great Lakes Commission Semiannual Meeting

MAY 11-12, 2021 • ONLINE

1300 Victors Way, Suite 1350 Ann Arbor, MI 48108-5203 734-971-9135 • www.glc.org

@GLCommission facebook.com/greatlakescommission #GLCSemi2021 Table of Contents

1 Agenda — p. 3

2 Minutes and Observer Request — p. 6

3 Action Items — p. 30

4 Speaker and Observer Materials — p. 34

5 Strategic Plan Updates — p. 49

6 Reference — p. 91

ONLINE MEETING – REMOTE ACCESS TO BE ANNOUNCED

DRAFT AGENDA – May 10, 2021

Tuesday, May 11 All times are Eastern

9:30 a.m. Call to Order and Roll Call Sharon Jackson Great Lakes Commission Chair, Deputy General Counsel, Office of the Governor of Indiana Commissioners

9:40 a.m. Opening Remarks and Report of the Chair Sharon Jackson, Chair

9:55 a.m. Business of the Great Lakes Commission Sharon Jackson, Chair • Review and Approval of Agenda • Approval of Minutes o 2020 Annual Meeting – November 17-19, 2020 • Observer Request from Audubon Great Lakes • Presentation of Action Items Brenda Sandberg, Pennsylvania Commissioner, Executive o Report of Resolutions Review Committee Director, Erie-Western Pennsylvania Port Authority

10:25 a.m. Interim Executive Director Report Erika Jensen, Interim Executive Director • GLC Program/Project Updates

10:40 a.m. Health Break

10:50 a.m. Keynote Remarks Michael S. Regan, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

11:00 a.m. Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Update Chris Korleski, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office

11:25 a.m. Great Lakes Advisory Board (GLAB) Update Steve Galarneau, GLAB Co-Chair, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

11:50 a.m. Adjourn morning session Sharon Jackson, Chair

1:50 p.m. Reconvene Sharon Jackson, Chair

1:55 p.m. Keynote Remarks Martha Williams, Principal Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

2:10 p.m. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Update: Moderator: Kay Nelson, Director, Environmental Affairs, Soo Locks, Brandon Road, and Coastal Resiliency Northwest Indiana Forum Speakers: Mollie Mahoney, Project Manager, Detroit District Andrew Leichty, Project Manager, Rock Island District David F. Bucaro, Chief, Project Management Section, Chicago District

3:00 p.m. Québec’s Maritime Strategy Ministre Chantal Rouleau, Ministère des Transports

3:30 p.m. Health Break

3:40 p.m. Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Maritime Moderator: David Naftzger, Executive Director, Transportation Panel Discussion: Modernization, Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers Sustainability and Resiliency Panelists: David Martin, Owner, CSL Group BJ Murray, Section Chief, Aviation & Marine Transportation Program Planning, Illinois Department of Transportation Tom Rayburn, Vice President, Lake Carriers’ Association

5:00 p.m. Adjourn for the day

5:15 p.m. Commissioner Networking

Wednesday, May 12 All times are Eastern

9:30 a.m. Call to Order Sharon Jackson, Chair

9:35 a.m. Keynote Remarks Terry Cosby, Acting Chief, USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service

10:00 a.m. U.S. Legislative Updates: Climate and Infrastructure Navis Bermudez, Senior Professional Staff, House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (Majority)

10:20 a.m. Health Break

10:30 a.m. Water Infrastructure Investment + Community Crystal Davis, Vice President of Policy and Strategic Input = Positive Impact Engagement, Alliance for the Great Lakes

10:45 a.m. Water Quality and Infrastructure Panel Discussion: Moderator: Crystal Davis Equity, Access and Affordability Panelists: Brenda Coley, Milwaukee Water Commons Shadi Eskaf, UNC Environmental Finance Center Jim McGoff, Indiana Finance Authority Jerry Rouch, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Paul Vojtek, Erie Water Works

12:05 p.m. Observer Comments (1) GLC Observers

12:30 p.m. Adjourn morning session Sharon Jackson, Chair

2:00 p.m. Reconvene Sharon Jackson, Chair

2:05 p.m. Observer Comments (2)

Page 2 of 3 2:30 p.m. The Importance and Integration of TEK in Great Melonee Montano, Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) Lakes Issues: A GLIFWC Approach Outreach Specialist, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission

3:00 p.m. Health Break

3:10 p.m. Harmful Algal Blooms and Nutrient Management Moderator: Santina Wortman, U.S. Environmental Panel Discussion Protection Agency Panelists: Greg Baneck, Outagamie County (WI) Land Conservation Department Dr. Maria Bowman, USDA-Economic Research Service Dorienne Cushman, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Dr. Merrin Macrae, University of Waterloo Eric Saas, Ohio Department of Natural Resources Dr. Robert Sterner, University of Minnesota Duluth

4:30 p.m. Business of the Great Lakes Commission Sharon Jackson, Chair • Action Items

4:40 p.m. Invitation to 2021 Annual Meeting Erika Jensen, Interim Executive Director

4:45 p.m. Closing Remarks and Adjournment Sharon Jackson, Chair

Page 3 of 3 Minutes and Observer Request

Attached, for approval and/or review, are minutes from the following meetings and an observer request:

• 2020 Annual Meeting (for approval) • Minutes of the Board of Directors meetings held on October 15 and December 17, 2020; and January 21, February 18, and March 18, 2021 (for review only) • Request from Audobon Great Lakes for appointment as a formal Observer to the Great Lakes Commission (for approval)

Great Lakes Commission 2020 Annual Meeting Online November 17-19, 2020

Summary Minutes

Summary of Actions 1. Approved minutes from 2020 Semiannual Business Meeting 2. Approved Observer request from Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Legislative Caucus 3. Approved one resolution: Advancing Prevention and Control of Invasive Asian Carp 4. Approved two action items: a. Sunset expiring resolutions b. Establish an ad hoc committee on mercury contamination

Tuesday, November 17, 2020 – Afternoon Session The Annual Meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m. Eastern by GLC Chair, Sharon Jackson (IN). The following Commissioners, Associate Commissioners and Alternates were present: Loren Wobig, Yu-Feng Lin, Stephanie Comer - Illinois Sharon Jackson, Kay Nelson, Steven Fisher, Bruno Piggott - Indiana Candice Miller, James Clift, Jennifer McKay, Peter Manning, Rick Snyder, Marc Smith - Michigan Laura Bishop, Katrina Kessler, Rep. Jennifer Schultz, Rep. Paul Torkelson, Deb DeLuca, Sen. Ann Rest - Minnesota Jim Tierney, Eileen Murphy, Donald Zelazny - New York Mary Mertz, Thomas Rayburn - Ohio Ranissah Samah, Trevor Snyder, Ling Mark, Jennifer Keyes, Tija Dirks - Ontario Tim Bruno, Brenda Sandberg, Patrick Harkins, Kathy Dahlkemper - Pennsylvania Kerith Iverson, Marissa Gravel-Labelle, Frederic Lecomte, Nicole Trepanier, Guillaum Dubreuil, Vincent Gagnon-Lefebvre - Québec Todd Ambs, Steve Galarneau - Wisconsin

1) Call to order, opening remarks: Chair Jackson called the meeting to order and welcomed Commissioners.

2) Approval of Agenda: Chair Jackson reviewed the agenda. A motion to approve the agenda was made by Illinois, seconded by New York. The agenda for the meeting was approved unanimously.

3) Approval of minutes of from 2020 Semiannual Meeting: A motion to approve the minutes was made by Michigan, seconded by New York. The minutes were approved unanimously.

4) Observer Request: Chair Jackson presented a request by the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Legislative Caucus to become a GLC Observer. A motion to approve the request was made by Indiana, seconded by Minnesota. The request was approved unanimously. 5) Presentation of Resolution and Action Items a. A resolution entitled Advancing Prevention and Control of Invasive Asian Carp was introduced. During the May 2020 GLC business meeting, an ad hoc committee was proposed to develop a new resolution on invasive Asian Carp. The proposed resolution recommends variety of approaches to prevent the spread of invasive Asian carp.

a) Sunset expiring resolutions – The Resolutions Review Committee recommended sunsetting five resolutions: Renewed Call for Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (adopted March 1, 2011); Actions to Address the Threat to the Great Lakes from Asian Carp (adopted February 23, 2010); Support for Full Funding and Implementation of the 2011 Asian Carp Control Strategy Framework (adopted March 18, 2011); Advancing Solutions to Address the Threat to the Great Lakes From Asian Carp and Other Aquatic Invasive Species (adopted February 28, 2012); and Preventing the interbasin transfer of Asian carp and other invasive species (adopted March 5, 2014).

b) Ad hoc committee on mercury contamination– The Resolutions Review Committee recommended retaining the 2010 resolution Promoting Comprehensive Mercury Monitoring, Research and Reduction Efforts and establishing an ad hoc committee to update the GLC’s policy on mercury contamination.

6) Interim Executive Director Report – Interim Executive Director Erika Jensen provided an update on programs and projects at the GLC. She highlighted the agency’s Strategic Plan, which provides direction for its work through 2022.

7) Commissioner Roundtable – Each delegation provided updates on COVID-19 impacts to their jurisdiction, as well as delegation priorities and emerging issues. Comprehensive notes on this section are available upon request.

8) The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.

Wednesday, November 18, 2020 – Morning Session 1) Call to order, opening remarks: Chair Jackson called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. and welcomed attendees.

2) Regional Collaboration: Effective Partnerships to Protect and Enhance Great Lakes Basin Resources – GLC Vice Chair Todd Ambs (WI) moderated a panel on effective partnerships between Great Lakes stakeholders. Panelists included: Mike Ripley, Chippewa Ottawa Resource Authority; Bob Lambe, Great Lakes Fishery Commission; Laura Rubin, Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition; Steven Fisher, American Great Lakes Port Association; Rep. Robyn Gabel (IL), Great Lakes Legislative Caucus; Jon Altenberg, Great Lakes St. Lawrence Cities Initiative; and Olivia Ortega, Greater Cleveland Partnership, Great Lakes Metro Chambers Coalition.

3) Canada Water Agency – Mike Goffin, Director General Water Policy, Environment and Climate Change Canada, provided a background on Canada’s exploration of a new Water Agency.

4) Adjournment – Chair Jackson adjourned the morning session at 12:00 p.m.

Wednesday, November 18, 2020 – Afternoon Session 5) Reconvening – Chair Jackson reconvened the meeting at 1:30 p.m.

6) Innovation Spotlight: Hoola One Technologies: Anne-Sophie Lapointe, Chief Development Officer of Hoola One, introduced Hoola One’s beach cleaning device. The device was initially developed as a prototype for an engineering project at the University of Sherbrooke with the goal to create a technology that could pick up plastics, including microplastics.

7) IU Environmental Resilience Institute: Janet McCabe, Director of Indiana University’s Environmental Resilience Institute, presented Indiana University’s work to move from preparedness to action on environmental change. McCabe also provided the findings of the Indiana Climate Change Impacts Assessment, which reports on how climate change affects life in accessible language.

8) Climate Resilience and Stormwater Infrastructure: Emerging Models for Large-scale Investments: Sanjiv Sinha, Environmental Consulting and Technology, Inc.; Kevin Shafer, Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD); Oluwole McFoy, Buffalo Sewer Authority; Kyle Vander Linden, Credit Valley Conservation; and Bill Schleizer, Delta Institute presented on green stormwater infrastructure financing methods and work that needs to be done collectively to advance stormwater management.

9) Adjournment – Chair Jackson adjourned the meeting for the day at 3:45 p.m.

Thursday November 19, 2020 – Morning Session 1) Call to order: Chair Jackson called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. 2) Canada’s Climate Resilience Efforts: Patricia Fuller, Canada's Ambassador for Climate Change, provided remarks on Canada’s climate resilience efforts to date. 3) Climate Resilience Committee Report: Katrina Kessler, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Heather Pearson, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, provided an update from the GLC Standing Committee on Climate Resilience on its work thus far. The committee began with informal discussion in 2019 and has been working toward developing a framework for regional action. 4) Climate Resilience Panel Discussion: Commissioner Bruno Pigott (IN) led a discussion on climate resilience and invited panelists to provide high level feedback on concepts developed by the GLC Climate Resilience Committee. Panelists included Robert Sisson, U.S. Commissioner on the International Joint Commission; Heather Stiratt, NOAA’s Office of Coastal Management; David Bacarro, USACE; Chris Korleski, Director of U.S. EPA’s Great Lakes National Program Office; Lisa Duranciak, NRCS; Brad Potter, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and Dr. Ralph Grundel, USGS.

Thursday November 19, 2020 – Afternoon Session 5) Observer Comments: Comments were provided by the following Observers: Dave Naftzger, Great Lakes-St Lawrence Governors and Premiers; Mike Shriberg, National Wildlife Federation; Marc Gaden, Great Lakes Fishery Commission; Pierre Beland, International Joint Commission; Carl Platz, USACE; Mike Molnar, Coastal State Organization; Debbie Lee; NOAA; Jill Reinhart, NRCS; Joel Brammeier, Alliance for the Great Lakes; Jon Hortness, USGS; Lisa Janairo, Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Legislative Caucus; and Ana Serviente, GLOS. Any materials provided by Observers in advance of the meeting are included in the briefing book.

6) Ohio DNR Teen Advisory Council: Commissioner Mary Mertz (OH) introduced the mission of the ODNR Teen Advisory Council. Three Teen Advisors discussed the TAC’s efforts and their personal backgrounds with the Great Lakes. Presenters included Gabrielle “Gabby” Dennis, Lily Schwartz, and Madeline Shumaker.

7) Action Items and Resolutions: a. Commissioners Loren Wobig (IL) and Marc Smith (MI) presented a resolution entitled Advancing Prevention and Control of Invasive Asian Carp. Indiana motioned to approve the resolution; Illinois seconded. The resolution passed unanimously.

b. Sunset expiring resolutions – The Resolutions Review Committee recommended sunsetting five resolutions: Renewed Call for Reform of the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (adopted March 1, 2011); Actions to Address the Threat to the Great Lakes from Asian Carp (adopted February 23, 2010); Support for Full Funding and Implementation of the 2011 Asian Carp Control Strategy Framework (adopted March 18, 2011); Advancing Solutions to Address the Threat to the Great Lakes From Asian Carp and Other Aquatic Invasive Species (adopted February 28, 2012); and Preventing the interbasin transfer of Asian carp and other invasive species (adopted March 5, 2014). Indiana moved to sunset the resolutions; Pennsylvania seconded. The motion passed unanimously.

c. Ad hoc committee on mercury contamination– The Resolutions Review Committee recommended retaining the 2010 resolution Promoting Comprehensive Mercury Monitoring, Research and Reduction Efforts and establishing an ad hoc committee to update the GLC’s policy on mercury contamination. Minnesota moved to retain the resolution; Michigan seconded. The resolution passed unanimously. Michigan moved to establish the ad hoc committee; Pennsylvania seconded. The resolution passed unanimously.

8) Nominating Committee: Commissioner Tim Bruno (PA) provided a report from the Nominating Committee. The committee recommended Sharon Jackson and Todd Ambs be reappointed chair and vice chair, respectively. No other nominations were made by Commissioners. Pennsylvania moved to appoint; Indiana seconded. The appointments were passed unanimously.

9) Future Events: Interim Executive Director Erika Jensen presented the dates for a virtual Great Lakes Day and a virtual Semiannual meeting in March and May 2021, respectively.

10) Adjournment: Indiana moved to adjourn; Illinois seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 3:02pm Eastern on Thursday, November 19, 2020.

Respectfully submitted, Beth Wanamaker GLC Communications Manager

GREAT LAKES COMMISSION BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES October 15, 2020

1. Call Roll, Review and Approve Agenda and Minutes: The meeting was called to order at 9:32 a.m. EDT by Chair Jackson. Interim Executive Director Jensen called the roll and Chair Jackson briefly reviewed the meeting agenda. The agenda was approved with no changes. The minutes from the September 17 Board meeting were approved with no changes.

The following Board members were present:

Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana James Clift - Michigan Laura Bishop - Minnesota Jim Tierney - New York Mary Mertz - Ohio Ranissah Samah - Ontario Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Kerith Iverson - Québec Todd Ambs (joined late) - Wisconsin

Staff present: Erika Jensen, Tom Crane, Joe Bertram, Beth Wanamaker, Nicole Zacharda

2. Interim Executive Director Report: Interim Director Jensen has continued to reach out to partners to open the door for future collaboration. She reviewed several portions of a memo distributed to the Board as part of the meeting materials on ongoing GLC work and operations. • Personnel policies: Staff will focus on updating employee retention, recruitment and grievance procedures and would appreciate Board members sending any relevant helpful materials or contacts from their agencies for reference. • Communications survey: Beth Wanamaker is putting together a survey on communications with Commissioners and others; please reach out to her directly with any questions. • Observer request: The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Legislative Caucus has requested formal Observer status. The Board agreed to advance the request to full Commission for consideration at the November 2020 Annual Meeting. • Joyce Foundation proposal: Vice Chair Ambs noted his appreciation of the process for the proposal. It was confirmed that the proposal would pay for current staff time. Indiana moved to authorize staff to submit the abstract; Michigan seconded. The proposal was advanced unanimously. • NOAA/GLC Regional Partnership: Jensen noted that staff hosted webinars with state/provincial delegations to review current and potential future coastal habitat restoration projects that could be supported through the 2019 NOAA/GLC Regional Partnership. Jensen asked for final Board input on the list of projects to consider under year 3 (FY21) of the current partnership. • Commercial navigation/maritime program area: Jensen noted that staff are reviewing the commercial navigation/maritime program area. She requested a focused discussion with the Board or subset in the future to provide input on the GLC role on this issue and related program activities. Commissioner Iverson noted that GSGP is involved in this work and suggested meeting with their staff to ensure work is complementary. • Ballast water policy: Jensen noted that the U.S. EPA is moving forward with rulemaking under VIDA. Staff is seeking advice from the Board on a path forward for engaging on this issue. Commissioner Clift noted that the GLC may want to stay away from the issue; Michigan EGLE has requested a briefing. Chair Jackson suggested that the GLC follow the process outlined in the legislation and staff continue to monitor the process and update Commissioners. • Asian carp ad hoc committee and draft resolution: The subcommittee has provided the draft resolution for Board review. They plan to meet once again to update the resolution depending on Board input. Jensen asked for input on whether the Board wants to retain the committee on how to engage productively on the issue. Chair Jackson asked for a week for the Board to review the resolution. Jensen agreed to send a reminder email.

3. 2020 Annual Meeting update: The updated agenda and plans were reviewed, including options for virtual breakout rooms and networking time and/or reconvening as a full Commission. All sessions will be open to the public and time for formal Observer remarks have been included. Staff has also requested written remarks from Observers that can be included in the briefing book. Chair Jackson requested a list of Commissioners and staff with contact information for each to help with networking. The registration price is $50, although it can be waived if necessary. The meeting will be held on the Microsoft Teams platform with several run throughs. • Future GLC meetings: Staff is working on a virtual option for Great Lakes Day and potentially the Semiannual Meeting. The rotation will likely be continued although staff has considered Ann Arbor as the next meeting location. Jensen agreed to send potential dates to Commissioners.

4. Blue Accounting: Jensen updated the Board on work to refocus Blue Accounting in the near term, align it with the 2017-2022 Strategic Plan and integrate Blue Accounting into the GLC over the next two years. She included a series of slides in the Board packet. Staff is considering how to fold climate resiliency into this work. Jensen pointed to work that staff has done to distill BA communications into one short sentence. Commissioner Brand suggested using Blue Accounting to measure GLC programs for transparency and accounting.

5. Climate Resilience Committee: The committee has been working toward a draft action plan; it will not likely be ready for the Annual Meeting. Vice Chair Ambs suggested providing items for observers and partners to provide input.

6. Board Member-Only Discussion: Staff departed the call, and the Board held a closed discussion.

Respectfully submitted,

Erika Jensen Interim Executive Director EJ/bw

GREAT LAKES COMMISSION BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES December 17, 2020

1. Call Roll, Review and Approve Agenda and Minutes: The meeting was called to order at 9:31 a.m. EST by Chair Jackson. Interim Executive Director Jensen called roll and Chair Jackson briefly reviewed the meeting agenda. The agenda was approved with no changes. The minutes of the October 15, 2020 Board meeting were presented for approval. The minutes were approved with no changes.

The following Board members were present:

Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana James Clift - Michigan Laura Bishop - Minnesota Jim Tierney, Don Zelazny - New York Mary Mertz - Ohio Renissah Samah - Ontario Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Kerith Iverson - Québec Todd Ambs, Steve Galarneau - Wisconsin

Staff present: Erika Jensen, Tom Crane, Joe Bertram, Eric Brown, Beth Wanamaker, Nicole Zacharda

2. 2020 Annual Meeting Recap: Chair Jackson gave a brief recap of the 2020 Annual Meeting and invited comments and questions from the Board. Overall, the feedback from the Board was very positive, specifically noting the staff preparation for the meeting. Some speakers could have done better job of not reading from prepared statements. Many Board members commended Bruno Pigott’s moderation as very effective and engaging, and the breakout sessions were well received. It was suggested that GLC follow-up with participants post-meeting and request content and topics for future meetings.

3. Interim Executive Director Report: Interim Director Jensen provided an update on GLC operations and activities. A detailed update memo was included with the meeting materials. Jensen highlighted several items: a. Communications survey: A survey will be distributed to Commissioners shortly; GLC is looking for feedback by January 2021. b. Great Lakes Blue Economy Action Plan: An action plan (provided with board materials) was finalized in May 2020 which includes recommended actions for sustaining the Great Lakes Blue Economy. The GLC is hopeful to release the action plan in early 2021 following a release strategy discussion, and input from the Board. The report will be provided to the Board in advance so they can make a more informed decision regarding the release details. c. Ad Hoc Mercury Committee: There was an approved motion at the annual meeting to establish an ad hoc committee on Mercury Contamination to update Commission policy. Board members were reminded to provide appointments to the committee; only four jurisdictions have made appointments so far. d. Ad Hoc Federal Funding Committee: The committee was on pause following staff changes and competing priorities. Staff will reconvene the committee in early 2021. The current committee charge and appointments are included in the meeting materials reference; the Board is asked to review and make comment or changes if necessary. e. Blue Accounting: A more detailed update will be provided for the January Board meeting. f. Water Use Database Annual Report: The annual report is ready to be released; an embargoed press release was just distributed to Commissioners.

4. Finance Update: a. Quarterly financial report: Deputy Director Crane gave a brief overview; Financial Operations Manager Bertram gave a synopsis of the financial report (for quarter ending 9/30/20). It was noted that the Interim Finance Committee has received the October financial report and will continue to receive regular updates with the Board receiving quarterly updates. b. Audit report: Commissioner Bruno gave a synopsis of the 12/7/20 presentation given to the Interim Finance Committee by the audit team from Rehmann. He noted that for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2020 the Commission received an unmodified opinion from the auditors, which represents the highest level of assurance. This is the 14th year in a row that the Commission has received a “clean” opinion. There were no material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in internal controls reported, and there were no audit findings or questioned costs reported for the current year. • Action: Motion to approve FY2020 audit report. Audit report was approved. c. Other updates: Dues invoices were sent. Members are encouraged to process and pay as soon as possible. There was a brief discussion on the dues increase and reasoning behind the jump from $60,000 to $86,000 for the current year. A notice will be sent shortly to states outlining the rationale and schedule for future increases to allow states with differing budget cycles to more accurately plan.

5. 2021 Federal Priorities and Great Lakes Day: Senior Advisor for External Relations Eric Brown provided an update on recent U.S. Federal legislative activities, as well as plans for key GLC advocacy activities in 2021. There currently is a continuing resolution to fund government operations through December 18; an omnibus appropriation and COVID relief package will be put forward on 12/18/20. There are indications that GLRI will be funded between $321-335 million in the final omnibus appropriations bill. Staff will review the proposal and provide updates to the Board on progress. Brown also noted that Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur of Ohio has proposed establishing another Great Lakes agency. GLC staff will continue to communicate with her staff to understand potential role for the GLC. a. Draft Federal Priorities for 2021: This year’s theme is building a better basin; a draft is included with the meeting materials. Staff proposes to use the back page of the document to cast a forward-looking view on economy recovery opportunities. Staff is requesting initial feedback from the delegations on the draft by January 8, 2021. b. Great Lakes Day 2021: Great Lakes Day will be a virtual event to take place the first week of March 2021. The Northeast-Midwest Institute will continue to co-host the Congressional breakfast with GLC; staff will work with them to produce agenda, identify delegation speakers, etc. Staff will also explore the possibility of utilizing pre-recorded messages on social media to prior to event. We will do a “virtual fly-in” to meet with delegations and Congressional members/staff.

Board members discussed current GLRI structure and focus areas and whether they should be updated and revised to reflect needs which have evolved beyond the current GLRI action plan. Jensen recommended holding separate discussions with the Commissioners to consider specific GLRI related needs and opportunities. Staff noted that the GLC has facilitated discussions among its members to develop specific GLRI implementation recommendations to U.S. EPA GLNPO in the past.

6. Emerging issues/announcements: Commissioner Iverson noted that Quebec Premier Legault has sent a letter to Michigan Governor Whitmer addressing environmental and economic concerns with Enbridge Line 5. No comment or discussion contained therein, just a letter outlining concerns. Commissioner Samah also noted that Ontario Premier Ford sent a similar letter to Governor Whitmer last week.

7. Board Member-Only Discussion: Staff departed call at 10:43 a.m. EDT and the Board held a closed discussion.

Respectfully submitted,

Erika Jensen Interim Executive Director EJ/jb

GREAT LAKES COMMISSION BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES January 21, 2021

1. Roll Call, Review and Approve Agenda and Minutes: The meeting was called to order at 9:31 ET by Chair Jackson. Interim Executive Director Jensen called roll and Chair Jackson briefly reviewed the meeting agenda. There was a request to add harmful algae blooms as a topic to agenda item 5. Emerging Issues/ Announcements. The agenda was approved with this change. The minutes of the December 17, 2020 Board meeting were presented for approval. The minutes were approved with no changes.

The following Board members were present:

Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana James Clift - Michigan Laura Bishop - Minnesota Jim Tierney, Don Zelazny - New York Mary Mertz - Ohio Basia Puskar - Ontario Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Kerith Iverson - Québec Todd Ambs, Steve Galarneau - Wisconsin

Staff present: Erika Jensen, Tom Crane, Joe Bertram, Eric Brown, Beth Wanamaker, Nicole Zacharda

2. Interim Executive Director Report: Interim Executive Director Jensen provided a brief update on communication related items. GLC staff will begin hosting project briefings for Commissioners at regular intervals. The purpose of these briefings is to provide additional opportunities to connect Commissioners with GLC activities and staff, beyond the biannual GLC meetings. Scheduling and further details on the briefings will be shared via email. Jensen also noted that Commissioners were recently provided with an updated Commissioner contact list and that the list and other resources are available to Commissioners via a designated webpage on the GLC website.

3. Blue Accounting: Jensen provided an update on the GLC’s Blue Accounting Initiative and next steps. On the July 16, 2020 call, the GLC board was asked to appoint members to an ad hoc subcommittee to advise staff on the recommendations and next steps from internal and external assessments of the Blue Accounting initiative and its goal to connect data to Great Lakes policy makers. Over the period August - November 2020, the subcommittee met on a biweekly basis to discuss specific items. A summary of the subcommittee’s recommendations were provided in a memo to the Board. There were several items the subcommittee felt needed to be further addressed by the Board. Jensen requested that the Board agree to hold time (e.g., 30 minutes) every other Board call to provide feedback on key items. If there are items that require more lengthy discussion, then the Board may request that staff convene the ad hoc committee to discuss and provide a recommendation back to the Board. a. Action: The Board agreed to be decision-making body for Blue Accounting during this phase and to hold designated time to discuss outstanding items on every other Board call.

4. 2021 Federal Priorities and Great Lakes Day: a. End of year legislative update: GLC staff Eric Brown provided an update on end of year legislative activities which were summarized in memo provided with the call materials. A key victory in 2020 was the reauthorization of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative with an increase in appropriations over the next five years. b. Revised draft statement of priorities: Brown reviewed edits and comments on the 2021 draft statemetn of federal proirities received during the review period. Board members engaged in further discussion on the draft noting concerns associated with PFAS contamination at federal sites; suggestions for language related to climate resilience; specifying water infrastructure as the mechanism for ensuring clean and safe water; and strengthening language around addressing HABs. Jensen reviewed the timeline for finalizing the document which includes presenting it to the Board on the February 2021 call for approval. c. Plans for Great Lakes Day: Brown provided an overview of the schedule and plans for Great Lakes Day 2021. GLC events this year will include a Commissioner-only meeting on the afternoon of Monday, March 1; self-scheduled virtural visits with members of Congress throughout March 2-4; and the Congressional “breakfast” reception the morning of Wednesday, March 3. The week will feature live and pre-recorded remarks from members of Congress. Other activities will include the release of the joint statement of regional priorities and a virtual reception hosted by the Embassy of Canada. A complete schedule and additional details will be shared over the coming weeks.

5. Emerging issues/announcements: a. Brandon Road project: Commissioners Loren Wobig (IL) and James Clift (MI) provided a brief update on recent advancements on an Asian carp prevention project at the Brandon Road Lock and Dam. They also noted that they are planning briefings with the other states and provinces as activities move forward. b. Harmful Algal Blooms: Commissioner Jim Tierney (NY) noted that HABs are a cross-regional issue and highlighted a new research agenda to better understand the causes of HABs and mechanisms to abate HABs. The Board expressed general interest in a future focused discussion on this topic. c. GLC Board Retreat: Chair Jackson introduced the idea of holding a Board retreat in 2021 to provide focused time for Board members to address critical issues. Potential topics for a retreat include GLC operations/capacity/funding, strategic planning, the GLRI, and Blue Accounting. Board members requested that staff scope out a possible schedule and agenda prior to the next meeting. In addition, Board members expressed interest in a near-term discussion on GLRI, to be held in advance of when states will be discussion their priorities with U.S. EPA GLNPO.

6. Board Member-Only Discussion: Staff departed call at 10:34 a.m. EDT and the Board held a closed discussion.

Respectfully submitted,

Erika Jensen Interim Executive Director

GREAT LAKES COMMISSION BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES February 18, 2021

1. Roll Call, Review and Approve Agenda and Minutes: The meeting was called to order at 9:31 ET by Chair Jackson. Interim Executive Director Jensen called roll and Chair Jackson briefly reviewed the meeting agenda. The agenda was approved with no changes. The minutes of the January 21, 2021 Board meeting were presented for approval. The minutes were approved with no changes.

The following Board members were present:

Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana James Clift - Michigan Laura Bishop - Minnesota Jim Tierney, Don Zelazny - New York Mary Mertz - Ohio Basia Puskar - Ontario Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Kerith Brand - Québec Todd Ambs, Steve Galarneau - Wisconsin

Staff present: Erika Jensen, Joe Bertram, Eric Brown, Beth Wanamaker, Nicole Zacharda

2. Interim Executive Director Report: Interim Executive Director Jensen provided a brief update on staffing and announced the hire of a new GIS Manager for the GLC, who will start on March 1, 2021. Jensen discussed planning for the GLC Semiannual Meeting in May, noting that a feedback survey related to the 2020 GLC Annual Meeting is still open, and that GLC staff is still seeking volunteers for the 2021 Semiannual Meeting planning committee. Jensen also discussed planning for a potential board retreat in spring 2021, including draft ideas. Board members were open to the format and proposed topics but requested that strategic planning be added to the discussion items. Jensen will send a scheduling poll to board members to find dates and times that work for as many board members as possible.

3. Financial Update: Joe Bertram provided an update on financial statements for the first six months of fiscal year 2021.

4. Federal Priorities & Great Lakes Day: a. Great Lakes Day: Eric Brown provided an update on Great Lakes Day planning, including congressional meetings and an update on the GLC/NEMWI virtual reception. Staff will coordinate with the Board on office visits as necessary. b. Federal priorities: Brown provided an overview of the 2021 GLC Federal Priorities statement and noted that Great Lakes Regional Sediment Management Team and Great Lakes Dredging Team has been removed from the priorities. • Action: The board approved the 2021 GLC Federal Priorities statement with the above amendment. c. Regional priorities: Brown provided an overview of the 2021 joint priority statement with external groups. Board members discussed several items for consideration in the 2022 joint priority statement related to harmful algal blooms, PFAS, and equity. • Action: The board approved the 2021 joint priorities statement d. Winter Commerce Act: Brown provided an overview of the Great Lakes Winter Commerce Act, which would address icebreaking needs in the Great Lakes. This bill was originally introduced last year; a version for the 117th congress is expected to be introduced soon. This legislation is consistent with existing federal priorities. Board members were given to the end of the week to approve supporting the legislation. It was noted that the GLC has supported specific legislation in the past.

5. Blue Accounting: Nicole Zacharda provided an update on the GLC’s Blue Accounting Initiative and plans for the redesigned platform. Board members discussed visualization options and iconography. Staff and board members noted that the methodology behind setting metrics for the gauge would be developed in the future. a. Action: The Board agreed to pursue a gauge icon that features nine status segments and a needle to show progress.

6. Emerging issues/announcements: a. No discussion

7. Board Member-Only Discussion: Staff departed call at 11:00 a.m. EDT and the Board held a closed discussion.

Respectfully submitted,

Erika Jensen Interim Executive Director EJ/eb

GREAT LAKES COMMISSION BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES March 18, 2021

1. Roll Call, Review and Approve Agenda and Minutes: The meeting was called to order at 9:32 ET by Chair Jackson. Interim Executive Director Jensen called roll and Chair Jackson briefly reviewed the meeting agenda. The agenda was approved with a clarification and one addition: Interim Executive Director Jensen would include an update on plans for the 2021 Annual Meeting in her report, and an item related to Brandon Road was added to the emerging issues agenda item. The minutes of the February 18, 2021 Board meeting were presented for approval and were approved with no changes.

The following Board members and designated alternates were present:

Loren Wobig - Illinois Sharon Jackson - Indiana James Clift - Michigan Laura Bishop - Minnesota Jim Tierney, Don Zelazny - New York Mindy Bankey - Ohio Basia Puskar - Ontario Tim Bruno - Pennsylvania Kerith Brand - Québec Todd Ambs, Steve Galarneau - Wisconsin

Staff present: Erika Jensen, Joe Bertram, Eric Brown, Tom Crane, Beth Wanamaker, Nicole Zacharda

2. Great Lakes Day Debrief: Board members offered generally positive feedback on Great Lakes Day events. Eric Brown of the GLC staff noted the joint regional priorities statement would be delivered to Biden Administration and the regional partner group is considering other potential follow-up activities. Board members briefly discussed infrastructure proposals that would be presented by the Biden Administration and Congress over the coming months. They suggested building off existing programs and other successful models and expressed a desire for ongoing conversations around the budget and infrastructure packages, including revisiting the GLC’s integrated water asset management report to inform priorities. PFAS was also noted as an issue for which the GLC could help build momentum for action.

3. Interim Executive Director Report: Interim Executive Director Jensen provided an update on several items: a. Annual Dues: Jensen provide the Board with a memo outlining the annual dues increase schedule that was agreed to by the Commission in 2019. This information is intended to help agencies iwith future budgeting process. b. Semiannual meeting planning: Jensen provided an overview of concepts for the May 2021 semiannual meeting and noted that a committee of volunteer commissioners will be convened in the next week to provide input to the planning process. The working theme for the meeting is Partnerships for Progress on Great Lakes Regional Priorities with meeting sessions based around GLC's priority advocacy and program areas. Jensen suggested as part of the meeting that the GLC should engage new U.S. Administration officials to reinforce GLC partnerships at the federal level; seek updates on legislative opportunities that GLC could influence to advance progress on key priorities; and invite partners to provide updates and participate in panel discussions to promote coordination and information-sharing There will also be an emphasis on diversity in panelists and speakers and conversation-based panels. c. Annual meeting planning: Jensen proposed that the 2021 Annual Meeting be held October 12-14 in Ann Arbor, Michigan. This would include a Commissioner dinner on October 12 and the full meeting on October 13-14. Jensen will send a request out to Commissioners later today to identify any potential conflicts. In addition, staff would plan to return the meeting location rotation schedule in 2022 with locations missed in 2020 in Kenosha, Wisc. and Erie, Penn. d. Funding proposal abstract: Jensen described an open funding opportunity through the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to build on and expand our climate resiliency work. An abstract for a proposed project was provided with the meeting materials. Staff are proposing a project with three main elements: (1) further refining the action plan and developing metrics of progress for Blue Accounting; (2) working with the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Legislative Caucus on related policy needs through their Birkholz Institute; and (2) setting up a mentoring network for communities modeled after the Great Infrastructure Champions project. Jensen noted a critical component of the opportunity is the 1:1 match requirement. Staff proposed an initial outline for how to meet this requirement using in-kind time and is investigating additional mechanisms. Staff clarified that cash match is also acceptable. The Board requested an opportunity to review the draft proposal if GLC is invited to submit a full proposal. • Action: The Board approved staff to submit a preproposal to NFWF based on the abstract.

4. Board Retreat Planning: Jensen reviewed the update schedule and plan for an April Board retreat that was provided in the meeting materials. There were no concerns with the plans as presented.

5. Emerging issues/announcements: a. CARES Act Funding: Vice Chair Ambs shared that the state of Wisconsin is considering priority projects that could be implemented with additional funding the state would be receiving under the second CARES Act and asked Board members to share if they were receiving similar requests. b. Brandon Road Project Facilitation: Commissioner Wobig and Interim Executive Director Jensen described a request from Illinois and Michigan for GLC assistance in coordinating discussions of the states and provinces related to the proposed Asian carp prevention project at Brandon Road. This is building off of the July 2019 meeting which the GLC assisted with, including the hiring of Kearns and West to facilitate and document the meeting. The first step would be to further flesh out the process, communication needs, and decision points (if any), as part of the larger project management plan development. In addition, a funding source would be needed for this work, as the GLC currently does not have funds to support significant staff involvement or the hiring a facilitator. Initial discussions will help us understand the timeline and level of effort needed, which would support a funding request. Board members did not express any concerns with moving forward with this activity.

6. Board Member-Only Discussion: Staff departed call at 10:48 a.m. EDT and the Board held a closed discussion.

Respectfully submitted,

Erika Jensen Interim Executive Director

March 30, 2021

Sharon Jackson Deputy General Counsel Office of the Governor of Indiana, and Chair, Great Lakes Commission 200 W. Washington Street, Room 206 Indianapolis, IN 46204

Dear Ms. Jackson,

Audubon Great Lakes (AGL) is committed to restoring the Great Lakes for the birds and people who depend on them. As AGL’s executive director, I humbly request that the Great Lakes Commission Board formally grant AGL status as an Observer of the Commission.

AGL serves as National Audubon Society’s regional office for Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin. We restore and protect critical habitat for migratory and breeding birds across the region, and engage communities of volunteer and advocates for the Great Lakes. We have over 50 chapters, nearly 300,000 members, and 40 staff across our 5-state region, along with two nature centers in Ohio. Across the eight Great Lakes states, Audubon currently has 121 chapters and nearly 400,000 members. Our report, Audubon’s Vision: Restoring the Great Lakes for Birds and People, serves as our blueprint to restore 300,000 acres in 12 priority coastal areas in the basin.* Marnie Urso, AGL’s Senior Policy Director, also serves as co-chair for Healing Our Waters Coalition.

We are grateful for our ongoing partnership with the Great Lakes Commission. For example, in 2019, we had the great pleasure of co-leading the inaugural Great Lakes Coastal Wetland Symposium with the GLC and the Great Lakes Coastal Assembly. Additionally, the GLC is currently funding our work to restore over 100 acres of vulnerable and rare coastal habitat in the Calumet region, and to reconnect Powderhorn Lake and Wolf Lake. I look forward to our continued partnership and collaboration in the coming years.

Please contact me at 312.453.0230 x2022 or [email protected] with any questions and/or for additional information to support our request to become a Great Lakes Commission Observer. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Michelle Parker Executive Director and Vice President, Audubon Great Lakes

* Executive Summary attached TITLE OF SECTION HERE

AUDUBON’S VISION Restoring the Great Lakes for Birds and People EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

AUDUBON greatlakes.audubon.org 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Great Lakes Chapter Territories Membership Density; 1 dot = 100 members National Chapters Audubon Audubon Centers Society r e a t The National Audubon Society is one of L the oldest, largest, and most influential e conservation organizations in the United Audubon s Minnesota W States. Since 1905, a passion for birds and r nature has been the driving force behind s h e d Audubon’s legacy. The organization has Schlitz Audubon played a critical role in some of the most Nature Center Beaver Meadow Montezuma Audubon Center Audubon Center Audubon significant victories for birds and the New York environment, including the establishment Audubon Audubon Community of the first national wildlife refuges; the Great Lakes Nature Center banning of pesticide DDT in 1972; landmark legislation like the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts; and the establishment of the U.S. Audubon Pennsylvania Aullwood Grange Insurance Environmental Protection Agency. Audubon Audubon Center Audubon Center advocates broadly for conservation through science, policy, education, and on-the-ground conservation action. AUDUBON’S OFFICES, CENTERS, CHAPTERS, AND MEMBERS IN THE GREAT LAKES REGION

Audubon is a nonprofit conservation organization. Learn more at audubon.org and follow us on Twitter and Instagram at PROBLEM Coastal development, climate change, and destructive invasive species threaten the @AUDUBONSOCIETY. watershed systems that support this great range of bird species.

SOLUTION Audubon has created a cohesive strategy to engage communities across the region AUDUBON.ORG/GREATLAKES to address the threats to Great Lakes birds. With more than 10,000 miles of shoreline, we have focused our attention on the nearshore watersheds of the Great Lakes. These forested and wetland areas provide significant benefits to birds and people. By modeling and analyzing bird populations, water quality, and climate resiliency factors, we have a blueprint for how to best conserve indispensable coastal areas. Focused restoration and management of habitats are essential to revive and protect ecological systems that support bird species.

2 AUDUBON’S VISION Restoring the Great Lakes Region for Birds and People Black-crowned Night-Heron AUDUBON greatlakes.audubon.org 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Audubon’s Strategies and Objectives Our overall conservation goal is to improve Great Lakes water quality and stabilize declining bird populations. We use four strategies to do this: 1. Lead critical science; 2. Restore and manage habitat; 3. Engage local Vision for com­munities across the region; and 4. Drive public policy.

CONSERVATION GOAL the Great Improve Great Lakes water quality and stabilize declining bird populations by protecting and restoring the watershed’s coastal wetlands and their associated riparian systems.

Lakes STRATEGY 1 Lead critical science: Audubon leads the applied science that engages communities, fills critical Region information gaps, and informs sustainable natural resource management. Objective 1.1 Objective 1.2 Objective 1.3 Migratory and overwintering Baseline marsh bird occupancy Climate adaptation tools threats (environmental and/or status and baseline habitat- for Great Lakes coastal Audubon’s vision for the anthropogenic) to Black Terns quality metrics are determined wetlands are identified and Great Lakes includes ensuring as well as optimal breeding within at least 8 of 12 priority utilized by public natural area habitat conditions in the Great regions by 2025. landowners across the basin that the waters and lands of Lakes region are identified by 2025. Tools are shared with by 2025. at least 30 percent of lands this iconic ecosystem remain managed by or in municipalities healthy for the communities that are majority communities of birds and people that rely on of color. them for survival. We are STRATEGY 2 Restore and manage: Audubon restores habitat and influences the restoration and management of implementing a cohesive priority regions to stabilize populations of focal species.

strategy to achieve this vision. Objective 2.1 Objective 2.2 Objective 2.3 Ten focal marsh bird species Audubon restores 37,400 Habitat-quality metrics have stable or positive 10-year acres of high-priority coastal demonstrate improving trends population trends across the wetlands and associated at 8 or more of 12 priority basin by 2025. riparian watershed by 2030. regions by 2030. At least 40 percent of restored acres impact or engage municipalities that are majority communities of color.

AUDUBON’S VISION Restoring the Great Lakes Region for Birds and People Sandhill Crane Sandhill Crane AUDUBON greatlakes.audubon.org 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY GREAT LAKES PRIORITY SPECIES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

STRATEGY 3 Engage communities: Audubon’s network across the region is deeply engaged in science, policy, and Great Lakes conservation action.

Objective 3.1 Objective 3.2 Objective 3.3 Community scientists Wild Indigo programming At least 50 Audubon chapters Priority actively participate in bird actively connects communities and 100,000 members and/or water monitoring within of color to important natural participate in targeted all 12 priority regions by 2025. areas in 8 of 12 priority advocacy, monitoring, or Species Thirty-five percent of those regions by 2025. stewardship by 2025. About engaged in community science 35,000 of those taking action efforts come from communities are people of color. of color. Audubon’s Great Lakes

STRATEGY 4 strategy prioritizes coastal Drive public policy: Public policy supports adequate funding for Great Lakes conservation and robust wetland restoration and water-quality standards. conservation actions that Objective 4.1 Objective 4.2 Objective 4.3 Great Lakes Restoration Robust water-quality standards H2Ohio grants $900 million benefit marsh bird species. Initiative funding increases to and wetland protections are of funding to address water- $475 million per year by 2025. maintained throughout the quality issues and establish Regional populations of Great Lakes region. coastal habitat in Lake Erie these species have been by 2030. declining, and many are Objective 4.4 Objective 4.5 The Knowles-Nelson Fund in Wetlands and natural listed as endangered, Wisconsin—which preserves infrastructure is incentivized in natural areas and wildlife federal and state policies such threatened, or species of habitat, protects as H2Ohio, the Farm Bill, and concern in at least one of water quality and fisheries, the Water Resources and expands opportunities Development Act. the eight Great Lakes states. for outdoor recreation—is reauthorized for 10 years at $32 They serve as a barometer million per year by 2022. for coastal wetland health across the Great Lakes.

Virginia Rail

6 AUDUBON’S VISION Restoring the Great Lakes Region for Birds and People 7 AUDUBON’S VISION Restoring the GreatKing Lakes RailRegion for Birds and People Juvenile CommonAUDUBON Gallinule greatlakes.audubon.org 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

These species represent a variety of bird families and require different marsh habitat and conditions. Many of these species prefer to breed and forage in what is called hemi-marsh—a habitat type characterized by an Hemi-marsh Diversity Depends on Water even mix of vegetation and open water—while others prefer denser vegetation or more open marsh. Because marsh birds are sensitive to pollution, invasive species, and other water-related issues, Audubon and its Marshes in the Great Lakes region provide critical habitat for diverse wildlife that thrives in wet areas partners can use them as a barometer for coastal wetland health across the Great Lakes. dominated by grasses, rushes, and sedges. The dynamic nature of water within marshes is an important driver of the whole system. As the water level changes over time and area, it affects the amount of vegetation that Hemi-marsh creates ideal nesting cover for breeding marsh birds while also providing access to water for can grow, the type and pattern of growth, and how birds and other wildlife use the area. foraging. This habitat results from dynamic water levels that allow seeds to germinate during low water and fish, amphibians, and mammals to flourish during higher water. Beavers and muskrats, which also thrive in this system, help maintain it by building dams and chewing through vegetation.

Signs of Success: How to Bring Marsh Birds Back Thanks to intensive restoration, marsh bird populations have rebounded at Calumet’s Big Marsh Park. In 2015, Audubon documented only two focal species. Following invasive species control and water management, those numbers increased to 11 species in 2018. State endangered and threatened species, such as the Least Bittern and the Common Gallinule, which had not been active at the site in over a decade, now regularly breed at Big Marsh Park.

Black-crowned Total Marsh Sora American Bittern American Coot Bird Species Night-Heron Blue-winged Teal Common Gallinule Least Bittern Marsh Wren Pied-billed Grebe Swamp Sparrow Virginia Rail

SHALLOW, EMERGENT MIXED VEGETATION AND DEEPER, VEGETATION MARSH OPEN WATER MORE OPEN WATER

Shallow areas of the marsh, which Hemi (or “half”) marsh is an even mix of vegetation Deep water makes it virtually impossible for PRE-RESTORATION typically are found around the marsh’s edge, patches and open water. Taller plants that can emergent vegetation to grow, while floating and often become densely vegetated. More sunlight withstand long periods of deep water, such as submerged vegetation like pondweed and water 2015 2 • • can reach the soil, allowing for a broader range cattails and bulrushes, dominate the vegetation in lily persist. However, these open areas of the marsh of plants to germinate. Sedges and grasses tend hemi-marsh. American and Least Bitterns, Marsh are excellent places for marsh birds and waterfowl 2016 1 • to dominate, acting as a transition zone between Wrens, Soras, Blue-winged Teals, Virginia Rails, to swim, forage, and fish. Black Terns, Common upland and wetland areas. King Rails, Sedge and Yellow-headed Blackbirds especially depend Gallinules, and Pied-billed Grebes all utilize open POST-RESTORATION Wrens, and Swamp Sparrows all breed and nest in on this mix of open water and vegetation for both water areas for foraging, but also depend on denser emergent marsh vegetation. foraging and nesting. emergent or floating vegetation for nesting. 2017 •••••••• 8 2018 ••••••••••• 11 2019 ••••••••• 9

8 AUDUBON’S VISION Restoring the Great Lakes Region for Birds and People AUDUBON greatlakes.audubon.org 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Spatial Prioritization of U.S. Great Our 12 Priority Regions Lakes Coastal Wetlands Audubon developed a spatial prioritization method to identify the most important U.S. Great Lakes coastal wetlands for birds and Marathon people. Spatial prioritization is the method used for determining Thunder Bay geographic priority areas for conservation efforts. It includes modeling, data analysis, and interpretation of results to inform S u p k e e r a i L o conservation action. r

Duluth Houghton Audubon’s first Great Lakes coastal Tern, Blue-winged Teal, Common Gallinule, Saint Marys River and wetland prioritization used bird data to Least Bittern, Marsh Wren, Osprey, Pied- the Straits of Mackinac Marquette identify coastal areas that are important billed Grebe, Sandhill Crane, Sedge Wren, St. Louis River Sault Ste. Marie Estuary for marsh birds. Birdwatchers, who provide Sora, Swamp Sparrow, and Virginia Rail. critical data, are excellent volunteers and Utilizing bird data from the Coastal Wetland Green Bay Escanaba advocates for the birds in these coastal Monitoring Program and wetland habitat L areas. The prioritization also incorporated a Petoskey Marinette k conditions that determine suitability for data on nitrogen and phosphorus e Alpena these birds—such as the amount of coastal n Eastern Lake concentrations to help us target wetlands H a Traverse City Ontario Marshes u vegetation—we ranked wetlands (at a g and watersheds that could provide the Green Bay i Kingston r

h 100-meter resolution) within 30 kilometers Saginaw o greatest water-quality benefits to the c

n Watertown i of the shoreline based on their importance to Bay Great Lakes. M Braddock rio Toronto Lake Onta each of the 14 species. The fine-scale Sheboygan Bay Area e Oswego

k The model’s results guided our selection of resolution of this modeling effort allowed us

a Muskegon Saginaw Niagara Milwaukee Rochester 12 coastal wetland regions across the Great to be more effective in our project planning, L Eastern River Lakeshore Marshes Racine Lake Sarnia Corridor Bualo Montezuma Area Lakes where we now undertake conservation outreach, and partnership development in Holland Michigan action. Within these regions, we have also high-priority regions. e Detroit i r identified key landowners and stakeholders E Detroit and In the eight states within the Great Lakes e Erie with whom we are building strong Benton St. Clair Flats a k Chicago Harbor L Basin, 25 percent of the population is people relationships to facilitate restoration efforts. Gary Toledo Cleveland of color. In the areas surrounding our 12 Calumet After priority regions were identified in priority regions, communities of color make Western Lake Erie the first prioritization, Audubon took an up 30 percent of the population. That additional step to identify wetland targets percentage increase is indicative of the for restoration within each of the 12 priority region’s demographic future. To foster long- regions. A second iteration of the Great term durable public will for conservation, it Lakes coastal wetland prioritization identified is critical to consider these demographics in 14 species of marsh birds dependent on our spatial prioritization. high-quality wetland habitat: the American Bittern, Black-crowned Night-Heron, Black

10 AUDUBON’S VISION Restoring the Great Lakes Region for Birds and People AUDUBON greatlakes.audubon.org 11 125 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2125 Chicago, IL 60606

View full report here: URL

References?

AUDUBON.ORG/GREATLAKES Action Items

The following items are included in the Action Item section as information and background to the resolutions and action items for consideration at the Annual Meeting.

• Memorandum report of the Resolutions Review Committee

• Action Item – Recommended actions for sunsetting previous GLC Policy Resolutions

The resolutions review committee reviewed a single resolution adopting the GLC’s federal priorities at the 2011 Semiannual Meeting. At request of the Board, the committee also considered resolutions adopting the GLC’s federal priorities from 2012-2016 and in 2018. The committee recommended that all be sunset.

• Action Item – Form an Ad Hoc Committee to review 2007, 2012 and 2015 resolutions related to needs of and opportunities for small commercial and recreational harbors and coastal communities

The committee reviewed a 2007 resolution focused on the importance of recreational harbors that was retained by the GLC through action at the 2017 Annual Meeting, along with three other related resolutions, and recommended the creation of an Ad Hoc Committee to consider a more comprehensive updated resolution.

• Action Item – The GLC should prepare a statement (or letter) on infrastructure, communicating its views on infrastructure needs for the region

The GLC is working with partners on a letter of infrastructure priorities as the Biden administration and Congress prepare a comprehensive infrastructure package. The resolutions review committee recommends that the GLC also develop a statement (or letter) outlining its own infrastructure needs.

1300 Victors Way, Suite 1350 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108-5203 Office 734-971-9135 ▪ [email protected]

INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Erika S. Jensen

Memorandum

To: Great Lakes Commissioners, Associate Commissioners and Alternates

Fr: Erika Jensen, Interim Executive Director

Staff: Tom Crane, Deputy Director

Date: April 26, 2021

Re: Report of the Resolutions Review Committee

I. Purpose

This memo provides the report of the Resolutions Review Committee for recommended actions for resolutions passed at the Semiannual Meetings from 2011-2016 and 2018 of the Great Lakes Commission.

The memo also describes a review (with recommended actions) for additional resolutions passed at the 2007 Annual Meeting, the 2012 Semiannual Meeting, the 2015 Annual Meeting and the 2018 Semiannual Meeting.

II. Background

Since 2016, it has been the practice of the GLC to review existing resolutions upon their 10-year anniversary and recommend whether those resolutions should be retained (stand as originally passed), updated or sunsetted. A committee of commissioners is assigned to work with staff to review the resolutions passed 10 years previously and recommend to the Commission a suggested action for each resolution being reviewed prior to the corresponding Annual or Semiannual Meeting.

III. Recommendations

The resolutions review committee met via conference call on April 1, 2021 to review and discuss the resolutions to be acted on. The commissioners participating on this call included: Loren Wobig (IL), Bruno Piggott (IN), Brenda Sandberg (PA). Frederic Lecomte (QC) and Steve Galarneau (WI).

The committee reviewed a single resolution adopted at the 2011 Semiannual Meeting in Washington, D.C.: • Advancing Great Lakes Restoration and Economic Revitalization: Great Lakes Commission Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Priorities

At request of the GLC Board, the resolutions review committee subsequently also considered the following resolutions adopting the Commission’s federal priorities passed in 2012-2016; and 2018. A resolution adopting the annual federal priorities was not acted upon in 2017. It should be noted that beginning in 2013, the federal priorities were approved for the calendar year rather than the fiscal year.

• Priorities for Advancing Great Lakes Restoration and Economic Revitalization: Great Lakes Commission Federal Priorities for FY 2013 • Sustaining Environmental Restoration and Economic Revitalization: Great Lakes Commission Federal Priorities for 2013 • Advancing economic strength and environmental integrity for the Great Lakes region: Federal priorities for 2014 • Sustaining Great Lakes Restoration and Economic Revitalization: Great Lakes Commission federal priorities for 2015 • Great Lakes restoration and economic revitalization: Great Lakes Commission federal priorities for 2016 • An Agenda for Great Lakes Restoration and Economic Revitalization: Great Lakes Commission federal priorities for 2018

Resolutions Review Committee Recommendation (1): Sunset the resolutions on FY 2012 and FY 2013 federal priorities, and calendar year 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2018 federal priorities adopted at the Semiannual Meetings in 2011-2016 and 2018.

Rationale: These resolutions present the GLC’s annual federal priorities for a single fiscal or calendar year and are no longer relevant. ______

The committee also reviewed a 2007 resolution focused on the importance of recreational harbors that was retained by the Commission through action at the 2017 Annual Meeting, along with three other related resolutions: • Support for Adequate Maintenance of Great Lakes Recreational Harbors (2007) • Support for a New Approach to Navigation Maintenance Funding for Federally Authorized U.S. Great Lakes Ports and Harbors (2012) • Advancing coastal community revitalization through strengthened federal legislation and programs (2015) • Supporting Growth of the Cruising Industry in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Region (2018)

The committee discussed the importance of Great Lakes-St. Lawrence recreational harbors and coastal communities and considered the timeliness of revisiting this issue especially with the renewed emphasis on infrastructure under the current Biden Administration. While the 2007 resolution focused somewhat narrowly on dredging needs and the opportunity for the U.S. federal government to prioritize smaller commercial and recreational harbors for federal funding assistance for dredging, the committee stressed that a more comprehensive updated resolution will be desirable factoring in infrastructure needs, economic revitalization and coastal resilience priorities.

Resolutions Review Committee Recommendation (2): Appoint an ad-hoc committee of commissioners (and possibly other topical experts) to review the 2007, 2012 and 2015 resolutions related to needs of and opportunities for small commercial and recreational harbors and coastal communities.

Rationale: The committee considers the 2007, 2012 and 2015 resolutions to be closely enough related topically to be considered together in an updated resolution. The committee does not recommend considering the 2018 resolution on the cruising industry together with the others. There are numerous reasons for this, the two expressed ones being that the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers (GSGP) are also pursuing initiatives related to the cruising industry and that the main issues to promote greater opportunities for cruising seem more policy-related regarding customs and border crossing issues between the U.S. and Canada.

Resolutions Review Committee Recommendation (3): the GLC Board and Commissioners should prepare a statement (or letter) on infrastructure, communicating the Commission’s views on infrastructure needs for the region.

2

Rationale: The current U.S. administration is developing an ambitious infrastructure package and working with the Congress to prepare an infrastructure bill with the intent of passing this bill within the next several months. The Commission staff is working on a collaborative letter of infrastructure priorities, with seven other partner agencies/organizations that builds off of its joint priorities statement adopted by the Commission in February. A statement (or letter) from the Commission outlining infrastructure needs will allow the Commission to advocate for the interests of the region as developments occur on federal priorities this spring and summer.

3 Informational Materials

This section includes:

• GLC Materials o Great Lakes Harmful Algal Blooms: Current Knowledge Gaps o Researching the Effectiveness of Agricultural Programs in GLRI Priority Watersheds: REAP Final Report Executive Summary o Summary of key Great Lakes Commission water infrastructure recommendations and timeline for historic resolutions and projects

• Observer Materials o NOAA Observer Remarks

Great Lakes Harmful Algal Blooms: Current Knowledge Gaps

Freshwater Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) pose serious risks throughout the world to drinking water, recreation, and ecosystem health. The Laurentian Great Lakes of North America, which contain nearly 20% of the world’s available surface freshwater, have been experiencing an increase in HABs since the 1990s. Knowledge gaps relating to HABs remain even after extensive and ongoing research efforts. These knowledge gaps are presented below for the benefit of water resource managers, state, tribal, and federal agencies, legislators, and others involved in the development of policies to address HABs throughout the Great Lakes.

Background HABs and less severe nuisance algal blooms (NABs) have significant impacts on human use and enjoyment of riverine and coastal communities. In addition to recreational impacts such as poor aesthetics and beach closures, the toxins produced by HABs impact human health, drinking water treatment, and can be a contributing factor in pet and wildlife mortality.

Algal blooms result from a combination of factors. When excessive nutrients—principally phosphorus and nitrogen—are discharged from various human activities on the landscape, they make their way to the rivers feeding our Great Lakes and cause algal blooms in rivers and coastal areas. The changing climate in the region is causing an increase in intense storm events and overall precipitation, leading to more intense and flashier flows, which introduce more nutrients into streams, rivers, and coastal areas. Higher summertime temperatures can lead to algal blooms earlier in the season for longer durations. This altered hydrology and increase in temperature also affect the mobilization of legacy phosphorus (i.e. phosphorus that has accumulated over a number of years) residing in

1 farm fields, ditch and stream beds, and lake sediment. These impacts from our changing climate are compounded by the effects of invasive species: profuse invasive mussels in coastal areas increase the depth light penetrates into the water column and invasive Phragmites affects the ability of native coastal wetlands to remove nutrients from the water column. These disruptions create a snowball effect leading to economic losses and societal impacts in lakeshore communities.

Common HAB Knowledge Gaps across all Great Lakes These knowledge gaps were identified in a consensus based process by a subset of HABs Collaborative members, including both scientists and practitioners, that convened throughout 2020.

Watershed Runoff and Tributary Nutrient Loading Processes: • Cost and effectiveness of agricultural management practices for reducing the loss of phosphorus (especially dissolved reactive phosphorus) and nitrogen at a watershed scale. • Cumulative effects of multiple agricultural management practices for nutrients. • Optimal location for specific types of management practices. • Relative importance of different nutrient sources (e.g. farm field runoff, animal waste discharge, streambank erosion) on HAB formation. • The effect of climate change on the effectiveness of management practices (e.g., relative impact of evaporation, snow cover and/or frozen soil periods, storm intensity, temperature, etc). • Changes in soil chemistry and nutrient cycling due to changes in temperature and water availability. • The movement of legacy nutrients (e.g., phosphorus and nitrogen in farm fields, streambanks, and streambeds) throughout a watershed. • The fate and transport of phosphorus and nitrogen within streams. • Cost and effectiveness of in-stream nutrient abatement practices (e.g., phosphorus filters). • Relative importance of interannual variability in tributary nutrient loading on HAB formation.

In-Lake Processes and Bloom Development: • Release of nutrients from sediments in small lakes, embayments, rivers, and streams. • Relative importance of nutrient loading from tributaries versus in-lake processes on HAB formation. • Predicting movement of HABs within a lake, from formation to algae deposition. • The effect of changing atmospheric carbon levels on algal dynamics. • The effect of climate on coastal and open-lake currents and water column stability. • Refinement of remote sensing and the feasibility of the use of drones for smaller scale monitoring. • Evaluation and optimization of existing and emerging HAB control strategies (e.g. algaecides, cyanophages, harvesters, etc.) • Importance of phosphorus and nitrogen forms, ratios/proportions, and timing of delivery (i.e., when tributary nutrient loading occurs) on HAB formation. • Evaluation of the ability for HABs to respond to differing nutrient concentrations and forms of nutrients.

Bloom Toxicity: • Environmental signals or covariates that differentiate between toxic versus non-toxic HABs. • Methods to detect a broader range of HAB toxins and related compounds. • Evaluation of viruses that affect HABs and their potential role in releasing toxins. • Relationship of toxicity to algal bloom size. • Importance of phosphorus and nitrogen forms, ratios/proportions and timing of delivery on toxin formation. • Drivers of toxin production and understanding of conditions that promote more toxic strains of cyanobacteria. • Evaluation of benthic and epithetic (i.e. growing on other plants) algae in toxin formation and challenges for monitoring.

2 Negative Impacts to Humans, the Ecosystem, and the Economy:

• Effect of toxin exposure on humans through inhalation, fish consumption, and skin contact. • The relative importance of toxicity and algal blooms size in protecting human health. • Effect of related chemicals produced by HABs (e.g. anabaenopeptins, β-methylamino-L-alanine (BMAA), and euglenophycin) on humans. • Impact of exposure to mixtures of multiple toxins and related chemicals on humans. • Evaluation of toxins in fish tissue, plants, and other products consumed by humans and/or livestock. • The effects of HABs and associated toxins on aquatic habitats and food web. • The interaction between HABs and conditions of hypoxia in thermally stratified waterbodies. • Secondary impacts on tourism, recreation, fishing, and whether those are disproportionately impacting people of color and socioeconomically disadvantaged communities.

HABs Knowledge Gaps by Great Lake In addition to the general knowledge gaps across all the Great Lakes, each lake has unique knowledge gaps related to HABs. Green circles indicate known areas of HABs formation according to the 2017 report, Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia in the Great Lakes Research Plan and Action Strategy: An Interagency Report (DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33266.20167), with additional areas added by the authors based on more recent observations.

Lake Superior Lake Superior has the lowest nutrient concentrations of all the lakes and experiences the least intense HABs, which are shorter in duration and typically appear in the nearshore western region. Knowledge gaps for Lake Superior include the following:

• Determine why HABs appear despite conditions being unfavorable (e.g. cool temperatures and lower nutrient concentrations). • Identify the nutrient sources supporting HABs since the surrounding watershed is relatively undeveloped. • Relationship between ice cover and HAB formation. • Origin of seed source for localized HABs.

Lake Michigan Lake Michigan experiences HABs in Green Bay at the outlet of the Fox River in Wisconsin and in other shallow embayments, such as drowned river mouths on the eastern shore. HABs occur with the highest intensity in the southern portion of Green Bay. Knowledge gaps for Lake Michigan include the following:

• Drivers of cyanobacteria toxins in Green Bay. • Causes of variation in size, intensity, and duration of a HAB. • Determine nutrient targets to mitigate harmful algae, while still maintaining a healthy fishery.

3 Lake Huron Lake Huron experiences both HABs and benthic NABs in Saginaw Bay and the nearshore of Georgian Bay. Knowledge gaps for Lake Huron include the following:

• Drivers of nuisance organic material washing up on shores of public beaches. • Appropriate nutrient targets that mitigate nuisance and harmful algae while maintaining a desired fishery production.

Lake St. Clair While not typically included as a Great Lake, Lake St. Clair experiences HABs each year mostly in the southern portion of the Lake off the Canadian coast and is part of the complex of connecting water moving from Lake Huron to Lake Erie. Knowledge gaps for Lake St. Clair include the following:

• Drivers of size and duration of HAB and comparison between years. • Drivers of cyanobacteria toxins and location of those toxins within the lake. • Determine fate of HABs and HAB toxin that are transported through the Detroit River to Lake Erie. • Quantify nutrient loads from currently unmonitored tributaries to Lake St. Clair.

Lake Erie Lake Erie experiences annual HABs that usually occur from July through October. The predominate HAB occurs in the western portion of the Lake, however HABs also occur elsewhere in the Lake along the north shore. HABs are also a contributing factor in hypoxic conditions in the Lake’s central basin near Cleveland, Ohio. Knowledge gaps for Lake Erie include the following:

• Effect of timing of runoff events (i.e. when tributary nutrient loading occurs) and contribution of legacy phosphorus and nitrogen. • Importance of phosphorus and nitrogen forms and ratios as drivers of HABs. • Quantification of nutrients released from sediments and role in bloom dynamics. • Predicting how toxic a Lake Erie bloom dominated by the cyanobacteria Microcystis will be and what drives toxin concentration. • Modeling and prediction of nearshore blooms outside of the western Lake Erie basin that can impact recreation and drinking water quality (and potential linkages to western Lake Erie basin blooms). • Prediction of Sandusky Bay bloom flushing events and their downstream impacts on Lake Erie beaches and water supplies. Sandusky Bay is the long bay at the southeast edge of the western basin of the Lake. • The importance of benthic cyanobacteria and their toxin formation.

4 Lake Ontario Lake Ontario experiences sporadic HABs in bays and harbors along the US and Canadian coast as well as nuisance algal blooms in the nearshore zone. Knowledge gaps for Lake Ontario include the following:

• Relative importance of phosphorus and nitrogen loading from tributaries versus point sources and contributions from Lake Erie. • The role of internal loading of nutrients. Although listed in the Common Knowledge Gaps section, this is considered very important to understanding blooms occurring in bays and harbors in Lake Ontario. • The effect of climate on currents and water column stability. Although listed in the Common Knowledge Gaps section, this is considered very important to better understand HABs in Lake Ontario.

References Annex 4 Objectives and Targets Task Team. (2015, May 11). Recommended phosphorus loading targets for Lake Erie. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/report-recommended- phosphorus-loading-targets-lake-erie-201505.pdf

Bartlett, S., Cargnelli, L., Diep, N., Heinemann, K., Hinchey-Malloy, B., Joldersma, B., Lafrancois, B., LaPlante, E., & Zastepa, A. (2020, March 26) Lakewide Management, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, & HABs [Webinar]. Available from: https://www.glc.org/work/habs/webinars

Ohio Departments of Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environmental Protection (n.d.). H2Ohio. Available from: https://h2.ohio.gov/

National Science and Technology Council. (2017, August 24). Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia in the Great Lakes Research Plan and Action Strategy: An Interagency Report. Available from: https://cdn.coastalscience.noaa.gov/page- attachments/research/Harmful%20Algal%20Blooms%20Report%20FINAL%20August.2017.pdf

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (2021) HABs Research Guide. Available from: https://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/water_pdf/researchguide.pdf

Contact us at www.glc.org/work/habs Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

5 RESEARCHING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS IN GLRI PRIORITY WATERSHEDS: REAP FINAL REPORT

Executive Summary

Project Background Approximately $96 million was invested between FY2010-2016 in agricultural incentives and other activities aimed at improving nearshore water quality in four priority watersheds (Maumee, Lower Fox, Saginaw, and Genesee) through Focus Area 3 of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). While most other evaluations of agricultural conservation programs focus on environmental outcomes, Researching the Effectiveness of Agricultural Programs (REAP) investigated whether investments have resulted in long- term changes in voluntary on-farm decision-making that improve water quality outcomes. The REAP team included GLC staff, researchers from The Ohio State University (OSU), Michigan State University Institute of Water Research (MSU IWR), AMP Insights, and a U.S. EPA Region 5 representative. From November 2017, through December 2019, the REAP team completed empirical analyses of primary1 and secondary2 data sources to investigate physical, social, and economic outcomes of GLRI Focus Area 3 investments. In addition, REAP included a review of GLRI-supported models and decision- support tools. Conclusions have been synthesized to better understand obstacles and opportunities for increased engagement with farmers that will lead to sustainable change in conservation-minded behaviors among farmers in the four priority watersheds and, ultimately, REAP study area including boundaries for the four improved water quality within the GLRI Focus Area 3 Priority Watersheds, and the NRCS Great Lakes Basin. Phosphorus Priority sub watersheds

GLRI Programmatic Strengths and Opportunities to Improve Investment Outcomes The REAP team used primary qualitative and quantitative data from surveys, interview, and focus groups to assess GLRI’s key programmatic strengths and likely drivers of farmer behavior. GLRI has several unique qualities that stand apart from other traditional agricultural incentive programs such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service’s (NRCS) Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP) and leave it well-poised to make investments that result in sustainable, voluntary changes in on-farm behavior that contribute to improvements in water quality. However, the majority of Focus Area 3 funding between FY2010-2016 (between approximately 60-80%3) was allocated

1 “New” data from interviews, surveys, and focus groups completed by the REAP team. 2 “Previously existing” data (e.g. Census of Agriculture, U.S. Census Bureau, programmatic data for GLRI investments). 3 83% of funding was allocated to projects with the primary purpose of implementing practices. At least 58% went directly to incentive payments. Specific information about how the remaining 25% was allocated within projects was not available, but it can be said with certainty that a portion was also allocated toward practice implementation.

3 RESEARCHING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS IN GLRI PRIORITY WATERSHEDS: REAP FINAL REPORT

directly toward support of traditional Farm Bill programming or other projects focused on conservation practice (practice) implementation that closely resembles EQIP. While EQIP is highly effective at implementing practices, and the REAP analysis builds from the premise that practice implementation improves water quality, this outcome in isolation does not speak to the goal of influencing on-farm decision-making in ways that are likely to be sustained if/when funding for agricultural incentives is no longer available. Findings suggest that some GLRI Focus Area 3 investments included in this investigation did capitalize on GLRI’s unique strengths; however, GLRI’s potential to make investments that will directly bolster the sustainability of changes in farmer behavior leading to improved environmental outcomes is underutilized.

GLRI’s strengths include flexibility and support of innovative approaches, a reputation among farmers as having a personalized or grassroots feel, leeway to invest directly in outreach and education, relative simplicity and minimal paperwork for program enrollees, and its ability to expand local capacity for implementing conservation. Making an annual profit, managing soil health on individual farms, and cementing a personal legacy by passing a farm on to the next generation in better condition than when it was acquired ranked as the top concerns for priority watershed farmers. Messages related to nutrient loss (from personal farmland and the watershed in general) ranked as the lowest concerns. Through NRCS’s Conservation Technical Assistance, GLRI funding has been used for demonstration farms and associated outreach events which facilitate peer-to-peer information exchange. This is important given REAP’s finding that farmers prefer to receive information from peers or through personal interactions with local conservation district staff. However, based on available secondary data, only 2% of total funding was allocated toward projects with the direct goal of capacity building and outreach. Approximately 15% of GLRI Focus Area 3 funding was allocated toward monitoring, research, and decision-support tool development efforts that are potentially powerful tools for spreading awareness among farmers about the on-farm benefits of conservation.

These strengths contrast with traditional incentive programs that exclusively focus on practice installation and have strict requirements for what, how, and when practices can be implemented. Many farmers prefer not to engage with traditional federal programs due to an aversion to paperwork and contracts that include land management restrictions with a “regulatory” feel or the perception that practice standards are too generic to meet their farms’ unique needs. Skepticism and lack of knowledge about practice efficacy and benefits in terms of financial and operational benefits were also identified as common barriers to voluntarily engaging in conservation. In general, farmers who own large farms, are more educated, and have greater belief in practice efficacy are more likely to engage in voluntary conservation than those working smaller farms or rented land, and who have less education and belief in practice efficacy. GLRI has the unique ability to invest in programs that are designed to overcome these barriers and engage with farmers who have been historically unwilling or unable to participate in more traditional conservation programs.

Assessment of Physical and Economic Outcomes4 Significant data gaps about how and/or where some GLRI Focus Area 3 funds were invested and associated outcomes limited the REAP team’s ability to produce comprehensive empirical results. Data challenges included lack of access to federal interagency agreements, competing versions of priority watershed boundaries, and inconsistencies in the style and detail of project outcome reporting. Some GLRI-funded projects did not set explicit goals and therefore did not have clear criteria for evaluating success. Several basic questions could not be answered without significant caveats, including the total number of farmers

4 Summary one-pagers of priority watershed profiles, GLRI-specific data analysis, economic analysis, and focus group outcomes are included as Appendix A of the full REAP Final Report.

4 RESEARCHING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS IN GLRI PRIORITY WATERSHEDS: REAP FINAL REPORT

enrolled in GLRI Focus Area 3 programs, first time versus repeat enrollees, total acreage placed in conservation, number of jobs created, complete practice implementation tallies at the HUC12 scale, details about the types of activities (or project elements) and how funding was allocated to support those within individual projects, and the amount of funds leveraged through cost-share agreements. The data limitations encountered during this investigation point to substantial opportunities to improve the tracking of GLRI investment activities and associated outcomes so that a comprehensive and empirically based evaluation can be completed in the future.

The data that were collected for specific GLRI investments and made available to the REAP team point to a rubric for success that is focused on physical outcomes. This rubric understates the importance of social and economic indicators of success and inadvertently penalizes innovative projects whose short-term physical outcomes are unlikely to match those of traditional conservation practice investments utilizing well-established methods. Such innovative projects would be more appropriately judged based on outcomes such as their ability to enroll new farmers, sway the opinions of conservation detractors, transfer lessons learned to future investments, and demonstrate scalability of new ideas and methods that have been piloted on a small scale. In general, the focus on collection of physical outcome data misses an opportunity to lend empirical support to pervasive anecdotal accounts of GLRI Focus Area 3’s greatest strengths and success stories.

Despite these limitations, a robust analysis of physical and economic outcomes was completed using available secondary and proxy economic data. An economic impact analysis using the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis’ Regional Input-Output Modeling System concluded that $96 million in GLRI Focus Area 3 investments had an estimated economic impact of nearly $149 million, or an output multiplier of approximately 1.5 times the original investment. This analysis also estimated that between 135 and 210 jobs were created and retained as a result of these investments. Profiles highlighting key physical and demographic differences between the priority watersheds were constructed as a reference tool for future investment decisions. In terms of practice implementation, GLRI-supported EQIP was by far the leading program and the majority of contracts (52%) across all GLRI Focus Area 3 programs for practices were signed within NRCS’s Phosphorus Priority Area HUC12 sub-watersheds. Based on Census of Agriculture data, the number of acres with cover crops increased and the reported usage of fertilizer have decreased in the priority watersheds (with the exception of in the Lower Fox) since the inception of GLRI in 2010. While these changes in on-farm behavior correlate with GLRI’s focus (based on number of contracts signed) on cover crops and nutrient management, REAP was unable to determine a causal link between GLRI and these outcomes due to the unknown influence of non-GLRI incentive programs and voluntary conservation outside of government incentive programs.

Recommendations Based on the conclusions of REAP’s multi-faceted analysis, the following recommendations have been crafted in support of improving the effectiveness of future GLRI Focus Area 3 investments:

1. Increase federal interagency coordination to harmonize priority watershed boundaries and standardize data collection and tracking methods. 2. Expand and standardize data tracking that includes project elements in addition to conservation practice implementation and that can support empirical analyses related to social and economic investment outcomes.

5 RESEARCHING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS IN GLRI PRIORITY WATERSHEDS: REAP FINAL REPORT

3. Align reporting requirements with crop cycles and other time-bound elements while allowing greater flexibility within multi-year contracts with farmers to alleviate the risk of deviating from conservation plans due to weather or other unanticipated factors. 4. Increase multi-year investments supporting direct outreach (i.e., in-person public and private meetings and individual interactions) and traditional capacity building (i.e., additional personnel to increase implementation of traditional practices) at the state and local level in order to accommodate the timelines required for building both localized expertise in implementing conservation and personal relationships that drive program enrollment at the community and individual farm-scale. 5. Increase investments supporting innovative capacity building, such as new or emerging conservation technology and innovative approaches for expanding outreach to farmers, as well as continuing investment in the implementation of proven conservation methods and the bundling or stacking of proven practices to increase efficacy. 6. Refine outreach strategies to frame the benefits of conservation around primary farmer concerns including profits and soil health. Leverage personal relationships at the farm level between farmers and county conservation district staff to better understand individuals’ viewpoints about the primary drivers of profitability on their farm. 7. Invest in research that arms all stakeholders with data on the economic benefits of conservation practice adoption that can be used as an outreach and engagement tool to garner wider program participation and general support for voluntary conservation. 8. Increase outreach that targets landlords, farmers working rented land, and farm management companies who operate within the Great Lakes Basin. This could include offering financial incentives to landlords with lease agreements that include conservation requirements, augmenting incentives payments to increase financial benefits to farmers of implementing conservation practices on rented land, or allowing for the sale of cover crops to create an additional financial incentive for off-season conservation. 9. Invest in the purchase of conservation-oriented farming equipment for community use. Require equipment purchase grantees to devise outreach strategies that target large and mid- sized farms that may want to test out new equipment before purchasing it, as well as farmers working small farms that are open to using new conservation-oriented equipment but face barriers to purchasing it on their own. 10. Increase efforts to leverage information gleaned from multiple GLRI-funded tools, models, and monitoring efforts to bolster farmer confidence in conservation. This includes efforts to socialize GLRI-funded project managers and local technicians to existing resources, as well as strive to create tools that are more accessible/usable for farmers and specifically oriented towards helping them identify conservation practices that address their needs and align with their motivations.

6 Summary of key Great Lakes Commission water infrastructure recommendations and timeline for historic resolutions and projects

The recent award of funds from the Joyce Foundation will support two new efforts by the GLC to further its past work: (1) Convene a regional work group to develop “blueprint” for improved water infrastructure and services. Existing recommendations set forth below may provide a foundation for initial discussions with the regional work group and can help refresh priorities for inclusion in the blueprint. GLC staff request Commissioner suggestions for participants on the regional work group. Please designate a representative from your jurisdiction to sit on the regional work group for water infrastructure via email to [email protected]. (2) Develop a drinking water issue on Blue Accounting. GLC staff will form four topical advisory groups to identify appropriate goals and metrics to track progress in four categories: source water (building from the pilot Blue Accounting issue), water treatment, water distribution, and water access. Please identify potential members to serve on these advisory groups by email to [email protected]. The Great Lakes Commission has released several reports on water infrastructure identifying common water infrastructure challenges in the region and offering a variety of recommendations for scalable solutions. The summary below is intended to brief Commissioners on these past efforts and support the new work discussed above. Joint Action Plan for Clean Water Infrastructure and Services in the Great Lakes Region, September 2017 The Joint Action Plan was developed by the Great Lakes Commission’s Clean Water Infrastructure and Services Working Group with support from the Great Lakes Commission staff to identify infrastructure needs in Great Lakes basin jurisdictions and strategic actions to address the stark infrastructure challenges in the region. The Joint Action Plan included 17 recommendations at the federal, state, provincial, and local level to “achieve 21st century water services.” The Joint Action Plan was endorsed by the Great Lakes Commission via resolution at its 2017 Annual Meeting. Great Lakes Regional Green Infrastructure Policy Analysis: Addressing Barriers to Implementation, September 2018 Great Lakes Commission staff prepared a regional green infrastructure policy analysis under the Green Infrastructure Champions program with contributions from Credit Valley Conservation and input from the Green Infrastructure Champions Advisory Team. The report identified federal, state, and provincial policies that can either facilitate or hinder local adoption of green infrastructure. Recommendations in the report identified federal, state, and provincial actions that would create enabling conditions for municipalities to advance green infrastructure implementation.

1

IWAM Phase I Summary Report: Best Practices for Integrated Water Asset Management in the Great Lakes Basin, January 2020 Findings from the Integrated Water Asset Management (IWAM) project – which engaged over 150 water infrastructure practitioners through webinars and focus groups to identify barriers and opportunities for greater IWAM adoption – were summarized in a final report. The report shared nine key barriers to catalyzing IWAM and 30 recommended best practices at the federal, state, provincial, and local level to overcome the reported barriers.

FEDERAL Expand accessibility and equity of clean water infrastructure federal investments through technical assistance, streamlined permitting processes, simplified applications, and consideration of per-capita needs (Joint Action Plan) Increase funding to federal funding programs (including SRF and USDA-RD) and for research and development; expand project eligibility beyond construction and capital improvements; and enhance coordination between funding programs (Joint Action Plan, IWAM Summary Report, and GI Policy Analysis) Establish a water assistance program for low-income households unable to pay their water utility bills (Joint Action Plan and IWAM Summary Report) Promote and defend policies and strategies that protect source water and reduce costs for water treatment downstream (Joint Action Plan) STATE/PROVINCIAL Improve coordination of service delivery through a dedicated integrated planning office, position, or other means (Joint Action Plan and IWAM Summary Report) Adopt policies that compel asset management planning, including regulations requiring asset management, expansion of the scope of eligible uses of funding to include asset management, and/or incentives for asset management planning (Joint Action Plan, IWAM Summary Report, and GI Policy Analysis) Incentivize and provide technical assistance for voluntary consolidation and establish procedures and policies that facilitate consolidation, including flexibility on annexation and limitations on liability exposure (Joint Action Plan and IWAM Summary Report) Increase opportunities for funding clean water infrastructure through increased dedicated funding, expansion of eligible projects for existing funding programs, explicitly authorizing municipalities to establish stormwater utilities, and explicitly authorizing and providing support for customer assistance programs (Joint Action Plan, IWAM Summary Report, and GI Policy Analysis)

2

Encourage the exploration of public-private partnerships (P3s) as a potential source of private sector investment in clean water infrastructure and services (Joint Action Plan) LOCAL/MUNICIPAL Adopt strategic rate structures that account for full costs of expenditures and incentivize water conservation. Ensure that changes in rate structures are implemented in concert with mechanisms to assist ratepayers who cannot afford to pay for water services at necessary rates (Joint Action Plan and IWAM Summary Report) Consider regional or cross-sector consolidation if chronically unable to generate sufficient revenue to achieve compliance and/or maintain desired levels of service (IWAM Summary Report) Increase communication across sectors and with neighboring utilities, facilitated through interdepartmental and/or regional memorandums of understanding (IWAM Summary Report) Expand the use of green infrastructure to improve storm and wastewater management (Joint Action Plan and GI Policy Analysis) Consider innovative approaches to increase revenue streams, such as the creation of water fund, requiring developers to contribute to a public benefits fund, or other mechanisms to increase private investment in clean water infrastructure and services (Joint Action Plan)

GREAT LAKES COMMISSION WATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM AREA TIMELINE

Prepared by Margo Davis, Great Lakes Commission staff April 22, 2021

3

NOAA Observer Remarks

With water levels continuing to be high, but thankfully this year, being lower than last, it’s natural that climate resilience and being climate ready continues to be foremost on the minds of the states. Our inclusion as advisors on your Standing Committee on Climate Resilience is an example of the long list of partnerships we have developed with you over the years. Collaboration on the development of a joint climate action plan, such as what you are undertaking, is hard work and we are excited about where this Standing Committee is going, the direction of the current draft plan, and its potential to inform the region with specific actions that can be done at different levels of government and community.

NOAA is the climate agency. NOAA is a $5B weather, water and climate intelligence enterprise with many tools and programs that can assist you with climate resilience, especially along the Great Lakes coasts, but inland as well. NOAA was created in 1970 to define the link between our atmosphere and the oceans and Great Lakes. We now call this climate science and NOAA has been the world leader in climate science and service for 51 years, delivering climate services to federal agencies, states, Tribes, communities, and businesses.

NOAA’s mission is Science, Service, and Stewardship. We do applied science that provides data and other services to the world and promotes stewardship of our natural resources. NOAA is observing, measuring, monitoring, and collecting data using satellites, ships, buoys, planes, drones, sensors, and more. This publicly-accessible data feeds into NOAA’s climate and weather models, which provide daily, weekly, and monthly weather forecasts, and longer-term climate projections.

NOAA delivers climate services to other federal agencies, states, Tribes, communities, and businesses, providing 24x7 actionable environmental information from long-term environmental observations, data collection, and research to daily operational forecasts and management of our coastal and ocean resources. NOAA provides essential baseline and trend information to inform decision makers about the impacts of climate change on the Great Lakes with data on temperature, lake level, currents, species distribution, and more. NOAA’s offices and programs touch every U.S. community and affect every sector of our economy. From Sea Grant College extension agents and Digital Coast Program staff helping coastal communities adapt to climate change, to the National Integrated Drought Information System’s (NIDIS) early warnings to farmers, rural residents and tribal and indigenous communities, to the Regional Integrated Science Assessments (RISA) we provide tailored climate information to states across the country.

NOAA is responsible for providing data and information that helps people make science-based decisions, especially at the local level where planning for an uncertain future is the most difficult and where decision makers may need technical support. NOAA works to ensure that every community, especially vulnerable and underserved people, has access to the accurate weather and climate information they need to make decisions and adapt to the impacts of climate change.

We are building a foundation for future climate leadership, from our climate literacy lesson materials, to graduate and post-doctoral fellowship opportunities, to the online climate information portal, climate.gov, that is accessible to all.

And while NOAA was created to provide climate science and service, we realize that many different federal agencies and different levels of government and our communities are involved and we look forward to partnering and collaborating across the region.

Regional Collaboration is important to NOAA and we have a Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Team made up of all the key NOAA programs, positions and people within the Great Lakes basin, including our core partners - those organizations in the region that receive funding from NOAA. Many of these organizations work at the state level, such as our Sea Grant Programs, your state Coastal Zone Programs, the Great Lakes RISA program that provides climate assessments, and our Midwestern Regional Climate Center, just to name a few, and are all standing at the ready to provide much of the data, information, training and products and services that you have asked for.

The GLC staff are well acquainted with our Regional Coordinator, Jennifer Day, and she is available to connect you to our agency and answer questions on how NOAA can help.

1300 Victors Way, Suite 1350 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108-5203 Office 734-971-9135 ▪ [email protected]

INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Erika S. Jensen

Memorandum

To: Great Lakes Commissioners

Fr: Erika Jensen, Interim Executive Director

Date: April 30, 2021

Re: Great Lakes Commission Strategic Plan Progress Updates

Purpose In advance of each Great Lakes Commission meeting, Commission staff prepare updates on work to implement the Strategic Plan for the Great Lakes Commission 2017 – 2022. The purpose of these updates is to track Commission progress according to the Strategic Plan, and keep Commissioners informed of Commission projects and activities.

Background The following are updates prepared by staff on accomplishments Great Lakes Commission’s projects and activities since the 2020 Annual Meeting. The updates are organized according to the program areas identified in the Strategic Plan:

• Water Quality • Water Management and Infrastructure • Commercial Navigation • Economic Development and Waterfront Community Revitalization • Coastal Conservation and Habitat Restoration • Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention and Control • Information Management and Blue Accounting

Each program area includes a primary objective and a series of strategic actions to achieve that objective. The strategic actions are supported by specific projects and activities the Commission is undertaking or anticipates undertaking in the future. The Commission’s work since the 2020 Annual Meeting is summarized for each program area.

Request Commissioners should review the updates and follow-up as needed with staff.

Great Lakes Commission 2017-2022 Strategic Plan: Program Updates Updated May 3, 2021

Strategic Plan: Semiannual Update Report

The following report outlines work under each of the Great Lakes Commission’s seven Program Areas adopted under the adopted 2017-2022 Strategic Plan:

1. Water Quality 2. Water Management and Infrastructure 3. Commercial Navigation 4. Economic Development and Waterfront Community Revitalization 5. Coastal Conservation and Habitat Restoration 6. Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention and Control 7. Information Management and Blue Accounting

This summary report also includes an overview of GLC Policy and Advocacy work across the seven program areas. The Semiannual Update Report is prepared by GLC staff.

Water Quality

Objective: Identify, promote, and share innovative solutions to water quality challenges in both urban and rural settings, and advance approaches that encourage collective action to protect and improve water quality across diverse landscapes within watersheds. More information at www.glc.org/work/water-quality.

Strategic Actions:

• Protect and improve water quality by leading and partnering on projects; facilitating dialogue and building consensus; and delivering information that improves the region’s ability to measure progress on water quality protection and improvement.

• Lead the ErieStat project to track progress toward the shared goal of reducing phosphorus into western Lake Erie by 40% by 2025 and begin a drinking water supply pilot in the Blue Accounting initiative.

• Protect and improve water quality in urban and urbanizing areas by leading and partnering on green infrastructure projects and related activities, such as the Green Infrastructure Technology Transfer Collaborative, that can create enabling conditions to restore the fractured water cycle.

• Protect and improve water quality in rural and agricultural areas by leading and partnering on projects and activities that reduce sediment and nutrient loads into Great Lakes basin waters through partnerships with NRCS, conservation districts, authorities, and agricultural interests. Work ranges from administering funds to reduce sediment and nutrient runoff to projects that advance traditional and innovative approaches to manage sediment and nutrient loading in Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) priority watersheds and watershed-based solutions across the basin.

• Explore opportunities to support the states and provinces in tackling complex aspects of water quality, including water quality trading and other market-based approaches, leveraging the region’s abundant clean freshwater assets to advance more sustainable methods of agricultural production, and linking urban/urbanizing landscapes with rural/agricultural landscapes to improve water quality across entire watersheds.

• Support states and provinces in planning and adapting to water quality implications of climate change.

• Address critical water quality challenges, such harmful algal blooms, by facilitating regional forums, including collaboratives, such as the Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) Collaboratory, and participating in others, such as the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement’s annexes, to build consensus around shared water quality goals and associated solutions to achieve those goals.

• Advocate for refinements to U.S. federal policy and legislation to protect and improve water quality, including the U.S. Clean Water Act, the U.S. Safe Drinking Water Act, the U.S. Water Resources Development Act, and the U.S. Farm Bill.

Projects

Blue Accounting – ErieStat

2

Overview: ErieStat is a project within the Blue Accounting initiative that provides Lake Erie jurisdictions (Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Ontario, Pennsylvania, and New York, plus both federal governments) with information services to track progress toward phosphorus reduction goals for the lake. Through an initial work group of state and federal agency representatives and leading academic institutions, the project identified initial metrics and data for tracking progress toward the 40% reduction goals for Lake Erie’s western and central basins. ErieStat is also supporting the efforts of the Annex 4 Subcommittee, which was established under the 2012 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement to coordinate binational actions to manage phosphorus concentrations and loadings. Data supporting the selected water quality metrics has been aggregated and presented through www.blueaccounting.org as “Phosphorus control-ErieStat.” Work continues to develop protocols to track progress as the GLC works to deploy a new web-based platform this summer.

Funder(s): Erb Family Foundation and Joyce Foundation.

Partners: Lake Erie state/provincial and federal governments.

Schedule: October 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021.

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • The Erb Family Foundation provided an additional $100,000 in funding for one year (ending September 2021). • Steering Committee members are focused on transferring content into the new site and developing methodology to deploy the new icon for progress pages. • Water quality data is generally updated each June/July.

Lead Staff: Nicole Zacharda, [email protected]

Blue Accounting – Source Water

Overview: Blue Accounting’s Source Water pilot helps leaders set priorities and measure progress to protect drinking water at its source. “Source water” is defined as surface or groundwater prior to its collection and treatment as drinking water. A diverse work group of water professionals from the private, public, and non- profit sectors, representing nine Great Lakes states and provinces, identified initial goals and metrics organized around: strategies, investments, and progress. A key element of the Source Water pilot is networking water professionals around the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River basin to showcase innovation and craft a “common language” for tracking efforts to protect sources of drinking water.

Funder(s): Erb Family Foundation, Joyce Foundation.

Partners: Local, state/provincial, and federal governments, along with research institutions, nonprofits, and the private sector.

Schedule: June 2018 to December 2020.

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Work group discussions in 2020 revealed support for expanding the pilot to encompass other aspects of drinking water, including treatment, distribution, and affordability. A funding proposal was prepared for consideration by the Joyce Foundation with news expected in April 2021.

3

• Potential future collaboration with the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Legislative Caucus (Task Forces on lead and nutrients) and University of Michigan Water Center (Great Lakes sustainability indicators on drinking water affordability) has been discussed.

Lead Staff: Nicole Zacharda, [email protected].

Conservation Kick

Overview: Conservation Kick takes lessons learned from previous GLC efforts to catalyze water quality trading in the Great Lakes basin and focuses on an expanded universe of credit buyers, specifically drinking water utilities seeking opportunities to reduce source water risks associated with excess nutrients. The work relies on tools developed to support water quality trading, but the project does not support water quality trades at this time, instead favoring “stewardship crediting” for source water protection.

By diversifying buyers (which may also eventually include private philanthropy and corporate buyers) beyond wastewater permittees with compliance needs, this project seeks to create an economy of scale for water quality credit markets, catalyzing greater investment in soil health and water quality.

Funder(s): U.S. EPA, Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

Partners: U.S. EPA, USDA, Heidelberg University, Quantified Ventures, municipal water supplies, county conservation offices, and NGOs from around the Great Lakes basin. Schedule: March 2020 to February 2022.

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Credit buyers identified thus far include the City of Defiance, Ohio; Town of Geneva, New York; and City of Auburn, New York. Additional buyers are being recruited among River Raisin (Michigan) communities and potential buyers in the Lower Fox river valley (Wisconsin). • As updated fact sheet is available at: www.glc.org/work/enviromarkets

Lead Staff: Nicole Zacharda, [email protected]

Great Lakes Sediment & Nutrient Reduction Program

Overview: The GLC is celebrating the 30-year anniversary of the Great Lakes Sediment and Nutrient Reduction Program (GLSNRP), which provides grants to state and local governments and nonprofit organizations to implement conservation practices to reduce sediment and phosphorus runoff into the Great Lakes. In February, a Request for Proposals with proposals received mid-April 2021. Under the guidance of a Task Force which includes representatives from each Great Lakes state and our federal partner agencies, the GLC team is currently overseeing 40 active grants. Additional grantees selected for 2021 are anticipated to start work on October 1, 2021.

Funder(s): USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

Partners: Great Lakes states and NRCS.

Schedule: Ongoing, through annual awards.

4

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Plans for a first conference of GLSNRP grantees and partners to enable information-sharing across jurisdictions and the transfer of good ideas has been postponed for a second time due to the COVID- 19 crisis. The conference is now planned for August 16 and 17, 2022 at Maumee Bay State Park in Oregon, Ohio. • Board members will receive a summary of proposals slated for funding through the 2021 offering later this summer.

Lead Staff: Nicole Zacharda, [email protected].

HABs Collaborative

Overview: In partnership with the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Great Lakes Science Center, the GLC leads the Great Lakes HABs Collaborative, which provides a forum for communication and coordination among scientists and between scientists and managers working on HABs in the Great Lakes. Information is shared across the water research and management communities through a quarterly newsletter and webinars publicized through a robust listserv of almost 300 scientists and practitioners from across the Great Lakes basin.

The Collaborative is focused on producing high-value products for the basin through its work, including the recent fact sheet on “who does what” across management and scientific communities relative to harmful algal blooms and a longer fact sheet on knowledge gaps and research opportunities related to HABs in the Great Lakes basin.

Funder(s): USGS Great Lakes Science Center (with additional support through the GLRI)

Partners: USGS Great Lakes Science Center; HABs Collaborative Steering Committee

Schedule: July 2015 to May 2023

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • A new website is being built to serve as a “research dashboard” connecting the academic and management communities. • Upcoming work will focus on fact sheets on the human health impacts of HABs from multiple pathways (planned for release, spring 2021) and a session at the International Association of Great Lakes Research conference later in May 2021. • Funding for the fourth year of work (beginning June 1, 2021) has been reduced. The GLC team will be working with the Steering Committee to evaluate adjustments to increase the Collaborative’s value to the region and may seek additional sources of funding. • Prior to the budget cut, the Steering Committee was increasingly interested in promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion within the HABs research and management communities, with hope of developing internship opportunities for students in future years.

Lead Staff: Nicole Zacharda, [email protected]

Great Lakes Regional Sediment Management Team

5

Overview: The Great Lakes Regional Sediment Management Team began in 1997 as the Great Lakes Tributary Modeling program authorized under Section 516(e) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, as amended. The purpose of this program originally was to provide technical assistance to local and state agencies to reduce soil erosion and sediment and pollutant loadings to Great Lakes navigation channels and Areas of Concern. In 2017, this program was rebranded as the Great Lakes Regional Sediment Management Team. The new focus of the program is to provide a forum for information exchange and discussion surrounding nutrient reduction, sediment control efforts and nonpoint source pollution prevention and control efforts being pursued at the federal, state and local levels in the Great Lakes basin. Under this program, the Great Lakes Commission provides technical, facilitation and administrative support to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Buffalo, Chicago and Detroit Districts to advance Great Lakes regional sediment management priorities. GLC staff is responsible for program research, coordinating state involvement in the program, facilitating special projects, and planning and convening an annual Great Lakes sedimentation workshop projects and planning and convening an annual Great Lakes sedimentation workshop.

Funder(s): U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) – Buffalo District (LRB) (through LimnoTech, Inc., LRB’s IDIQ Contractor).

Partners: USACE Buffalo, Detroit and Chicago Districts, the Great Lakes States, the USACE- Engineering Research and Development Center (ERDC), U.S. EPA-GLNPO, USDA-NRCS, USGS, and numerous academic and private sector entities.

Schedule: Ongoing since 1997; current period October 1, 2018, to April 30, 2021.

Upcoming Activities: • Due to COVID-19, planning for the 2020 regional sediment management workshop has been delayed. Planning was resumed in July. This workshop was offered as a webinar series occurring each Tuesday in April 2021. The webinar series covered the following topics: urban stormwater and green infrastructure (April 6), coastal processes (April 13), habitat restoration (April 20), and agricultural nonpoint source runoff. The webinars were all attended by more than 200 people.

Lead Staff: Tom Crane, [email protected], Ken Gibbons, [email protected], and Margo Davis, [email protected].

6

Water Management and Infrastructure

Objective: Ensure that the waters of the Great Lakes basin continue to support the needs of communities, businesses, industries and ecology; are protected from development impacts, pollution, climate change and other stressors; and are managed in a balanced and sustainable manner for the use, benefit and enjoyment of people today and future generations.

More information about water management and infrastructure at www.glc.org/work/water-management

Strategic Actions:

• In partnership with the Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers, support decision-making and measure progress under the Sustainable Water Resources Agreement and Water Resources Compact by compiling, interpreting and disseminating consistent water withdrawal, diversion and consumptive use information; supporting the cumulative impact assessment called for under the Compact and the Agreement; and providing information on regional trends and state and provincial programs, practices and policies related to water use and conservation.

• Lead and engage in the development and dissemination of data and information necessary for implementing drinking, storm and wastewater management programs that identify critical needs and advance solutions to the benefit of public health and safety, water infrastructure and delivery, ecosystem health and water quality.

• Identify and advance solutions to water management and infrastructure challenges by facilitating forums, initiatives, and partnerships, including the GLC’s working group on water infrastructure.

• Raise awareness of the fundamental value of water and the need for infrastructure improvements by advocating for federal legislation and funding to support and accelerate drinking, storm and wastewater infrastructure improvements through the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund programs and other water management programs and by promoting the benefits of integrating water delivery and wastewater management services to the states, provinces and municipalities in the region.

Projects

Green Infrastructure Champions

Overview: The GLC launched a green infrastructure (GI) champions pilot program in October 2016 to build green infrastructure capacity within small and mid-sized communities across the Great Lakes basin. The program was renewed in 2018 for another two years. Elements include workshops, a competitive small grants program, and a peer-to peer mentoring network.

Funder(s): Erb Family Foundation.

Partners: Credit Valley Conservation; a Regional Champions Advisory Team.

7

Schedule: October 2018 to June 2021 (pilot program ran from October 2016 to September 2018; work was initially scheduled to conclude in September 2020, but a no-cost extension was provided by Erb to accommodate COVID impacts on the mini-grant projects).

Recent and Upcoming Activities • Five grantees received small awards to do local code audits and related work that builds capacity for scaling up green infrastructure: the City of Green Bay, WI; Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council (Cheboygan, MI); Red Squirrel Conservation (Kingston, ONT); Town of Lincoln, ONT; and Southern Tier Central Regional Planning & Development Board (Corning, NY). • More than 30 entities joined the peer-to-peer mentoring work, which ended in September 2020. • A sustainability assessment was prepared to review the value of the program to the region and consider the future of the work. A briefing on the assessment for Commissioners was held on February 12, 2021. Opportunities for continued support of the work are being sought.

Lead Staff: Margo Davis, [email protected]

Great Lakes Stormwater Collaborative

Overview: In November 2017, the Great Lakes Stormwater Collaborative (GLSC) launched with the vision to advance adoption of stormwater technology and practices by addressing the gap between the supply and demand side of stormwater management. GLSC aims to provide a forum for networking, partnership building, and the exchange of information to advance the development, transfer, and deployment of innovative stormwater management technologies and practices in the binational Great Lakes Region. The Collaborative is a multi-sector coalition of stormwater management stakeholders, led by a volunteer Leadership Team, that works to regionally address the impacts of the quantity and quality of stormwater, enhance ecosystem services, reduce nonpoint source pollution, and promote social and economic benefits of stormwater technology and practices.

Funder(s): Erb Family Foundation, Pure Oakland Water

Partners: Volunteer Leadership Team

Schedule: November 2017 to December 2019

Recent and Upcoming Activities • Host webinars on stormwater management topics • Prepared a detailed map featuring innovative stormwater management sites, including technical information on site specifics. • Opportunities to further develop the work are being sought in conjunction with development around the GI Champions program to integrate stormwater offerings and best meet the needs of the region. Following the initial funding to establish the group from the Erb Family Foundation, the group has been operating on a limited budget with funds from Erb Family Foundation, Pure Oakland Water, and a small number of sponsorships.

Lead Staff: Margo Davis, [email protected]

Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Regional Water Use Database

8

Overview: Through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers, the GLC manages the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Regional Water Use Database under the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River Water Resources Compact and Sustainable Water Resources Agreement. In this capacity, the GLC works with its member states and provinces to collect annual water use data and issue annual water use reports and interim cumulative impact assessments. The GLC, working with the state and provincial water managers, has a goal to continuously improve the quality and usefulness of the database.

Funder(s): The Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers

Partners: The Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers; the Great Lakes basin states and provinces

Schedule: Ongoing since 1987; MOU signed in 2009. Current period January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021.

• The Annual Report of the Great Lakes Regional Water Use Database – Representing 2019 Water Use Data was released on November 15, 2020. The report is available online at https://waterusedata.glc.org/pdf/2019-Water-Use-Report.pdf. GLC staff shared the findings of the report at the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River Water Resources Regional Body conference call meeting on December 8, 2020. • Water use reports for previous years are available on the GLC website at https://waterusedata.glc.org/annualreports.php. • A fact sheet is under development with the water use data managers to amplify outreach related to water use in the Great Lakes. • 2019 water use data was submitted by jurisdictions in August 2020 and metadata calls with each jurisdiction were completed by GLC staff in September 2020. GLC staff is preparing the report, which will be released in November 2020.

Lead Staff: Margo Davis, [email protected]

9

Commercial Navigation

Objective: Improve the efficiency, competitiveness, security, and sustainability of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River maritime transportation system to support the regional and national economies of the United States and Canada.

More information about the GLC’s commercial navigation work can be found at www.glc.org/work/commercial-navigation.

Strategic Actions:

• Collaborate with the Regional Maritime Entity and other stakeholders to support implementation of the governors’ and premiers’ Strategy for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Maritime Transportation System with a focus on establishing a maritime careers portal; maintaining the maritime asset inventory; managing data and information to track progress in implementing the strategy; and aligning data collection and reporting with the Blue Accounting initiative.

• In collaboration with the Regional Maritime Entity and other stakeholders, identify and advocate for priorities to maintain and strengthen the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River maritime transportation system, including allocating funds from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund; constructing a new large lock at the Soo Locks; dredging to maintain authorized depths of channels and harbors and additional depth needed in critical areas; repairing and investing in aging navigation infrastructure; ensuring adequate icebreaking capacity; developing sustainable strategies for managing dredged material; and supporting the development of technologies to improve the system’s environmental performance.

• Convene or participate in regional partnerships, forums, and initiatives related to the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River maritime transportation system, including the Regional Maritime Entity, Great Lakes Dredging Team, Great Ships Initiative, and the Great Lakes Small Harbors Coalition.

Projects

Blue Accounting – Maritime Transportation Overview: Blue Accounting is tracking progress in achieving the goals laid out in the governors’ and premiers’ 2016 Strategy for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Maritime Transportation System. In 2017 Blue Accounting updated cargo volume data and a maritime asset inventory and presented this information on the Blue Accounting Maritime Transportation platform (https://www.blueaccounting.org/issue/maritime-transportation). Moving forward, the Blue Accounting team will work with leaders from the maritime industry to identify and track additional economic and environmental metrics that show progress toward goals established in the regional maritime strategy.

Funder(s): Herrick Foundation.

Partners: The Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers and multiple U.S and Canadian maritime stakeholders serving on the Maritime Transportation Work Group.

10

Schedule: The second phase of the project began in September 2019. The working group continues to update data on current maritime performance metrics and new metrics, along with updated information on the status of maritime strategies and investments.

Recent and Upcoming Activities:

• In June 2019 released an expanded web platform that synthesizes data and information on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River maritime transportation system. • Reported on six key economic and environmental maritime performance metrics (cargo tonnage; cargo value; container cargo volume; growth in cruise tourism; reliability of navigation locks; and participation in the Green Marine Environmental Performance Certification Program). • Presented a comprehensive summary of strategies and investments for strengthening the maritime transportation system. • Maritime Transportation Work Group to be convened to identify new performance metrics and options for improved reporting on existing metrics; assess key target audiences and their information needs; and other priorities for the next phase of the project.

Lead Staff: Eric Brown, [email protected]

Great Lakes Dredging Team (GLDT)

Overview: The GLDT serves as a forum for both governmental and nongovernmental Great Lakes dredging interests to discuss the region’s dredging needs. In collaboration with its partners, the GLDT supports timely, cost-effective, and environmentally sustainable dredging practices at U.S. harbors and channels throughout the Great Lakes, connecting channels and tributaries. GLC staff has served as secretariat to the GLDT since 1997. In this role staff coordinates, plans, facilitates, and organizes all aspects of the work of the GLDT including support for the three standing committees, promoting the work of the GLDT through education and outreach and convening two full meetings of the GLDT each year.

Funder(s): The Commission’s work with the GLDT is currently unfunded by outside partners. Due to lack of outside financial support, the GLC suspended most of its activities related to the GLDT on March 31, 2021. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) will assume the role of convenor and facilitator of the GLDT under its Navigation Team in the Detroit District. Deputy Director, Tom Crane will continue to serve as a member of the GLDT’s organizing committee.

Partners: The Great Lakes states, U.S. EPA, USACE, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. DOT-Maritime Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, NOAA, and other partners.

Schedule: Ongoing since 1997; funding ended December 31, 2019. Modest work effort will continue as program development and new funding opportunities are explored.

Recent and Upcoming Activities:

• Convened the 2021 Semiannual Meeting as a webinar on February 26, 2021. • Completed a revised mission statement and operational guidelines. • Planned and convened quarterly informational webinars in 2020-2021 during COVID-19. The most recent webinar was held on February 26, 2021, prior to the GLDT Semiannual Meeting.

Lead Staff: Tom Crane, [email protected]

11

Lake Michigan Great Lakes Dredging Windows Symposium

Overview: The GLC is working with the Lake Michigan states and numerous federal agency tribal and academic partners to plan and convene a symposium on environmental dredging windows in the Lake Michigan basin. Environmental dredging windows – the times of year when navigation dredging, and dredged material placement are scheduled to cause the least adverse impact on environmentally sensitive aquatic ecosystems – has long been an area of interest for state and federal researchers and regulators in the Great Lakes region.

Historically, there have been few opportunities for these parties to come together for focused discussion on how dredging windows are determined, particularly among the multiple states and federal agencies that share jurisdictional oversight for navigation dredging in Great Lakes channels, harbors and tributaries. Working toward consensus on a complex issue like dredging windows is challenging on a Great Lakes basin- wide scale due to a variety of differences between the lakes related to climate, geography, geomorphology and limnology, to name a few.

Therefore, the planned symposium, to be held in mid-2021, has been designed with a more focused geographic scope; specifically, for the Lake Michigan basin.

Funder(s): Great Lakes Fishery Trust, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, the states of Illinois and Wisconsin. The states of Michigan, Indiana, USEPA and the USACE are contributing in- kind support for the symposium.

Schedule: October 2019 to September 2021. The symposium, originally planned for May 2020, was held on April 28, 2021 followed by an invitation only workshop on April 29, 2021. Lake Michigan States, U.S. EPA, USACE, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, US Geological Survey, Lake Carriers Association, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, and the Great Lakes Fishery Trust.

Recent and Upcoming Activities:

• A project steering committee has met every four to six weeks via conference call since late 2019. • Planning for the symposium and companion workshop was completed in March 2021. • The symposium was held on April 28, 2021, as a virtual event. A state-focused workshop was held on April 29 also as a virtual event. • A bibliography of research on environmental dredging windows has been completed. • An input/feedback questionnaire on environmental windows has been implemented by the state partners on the planning committee. This information was compiled and summarized in January 2021. • A proceedings document for the symposium and workshop will be prepared and available to the symposium and workshop attendees and the public by July 2021.

Lead Staff: Tom Crane, [email protected]

Additional Program Activities

• In September 2019, the GLC submitted comments on Transport Canada’s proposed Ballast Water Regulations as published in the Canada Gazette. The GLC urged Transport Canada to pursue a

12

structured dialogue among key participants to identify areas of agreement on performance standards and applicability; treatment technologies and best management practices; monitoring, inspections and compliance requirements; timing, flexibility and transparent communication; and needed innovations. The goal is to establish compatible regulations throughout the Great Lakes basin. • The GLC is contracting with CPCS, a transportation consulting firm, to evaluate the value proposition of a port data system for Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway System ports. It was completed in January 2020.

13

Economic Development and Waterfront Community Revitalization

Objective: Support the efforts of the states and provinces in collaboration with federal agencies, local communities, and nongovernmental stakeholders to restore and revitalize waterfront areas and advance policies, programs and funding to leverage water resources to support a strong regional economy and high quality of life.

More information can be found at www.glc.org/work/economic-development

Strategic Actions:

• Support research, disseminate information, and collaborate with regional leaders to quantify the economic value of Great Lakes water resources, the return on investments in environmental restoration and water-related infrastructure, and the ecosystem benefits and services generated by the Great Lakes, and facilitate a cooperative, regional approach to advancing the “Blue Economy.”

• Support the work of the Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers’ regional economic task force and collaborate with other partners such as the Council of Great Lakes Industries and the Great Lakes Metro Chambers Coalition, to strengthen water-related infrastructure, industries and commerce and facilitate a cooperative approach to improve regional economic performance and competitiveness.

• Support implementation of the GLRI and other regional programs to clean up and restore waterfront areas, and advance policies, funding and information exchange to assist the states, provinces and local communities in strategically leveraging water resources to strengthen local economies and provide benefits for residents and visitors.

• Advocate with Congress and federal agencies for programs, policies and funding that support state and local efforts to clean up and revitalize waterfront areas, including the GLRI, Coastal Zone Management Act, National Sea Grant College Program, and brownfields redevelopment programs, and assist in effectively implementing these programs and linking them with state and provincial priorities.

• Collaborate with other water-related commissions in the U.S., Canada, and abroad to share information, exchange strategies, and advance common goals directed at solving problems affecting water resources and leveraging them as vital regional assets.

Projects

Action Plan for the Great Lakes Blue Economy

Overview: In 2018 the GLC and the Council of Great Lakes Industries completed a project to develop a comprehensive estimate of the economic impact of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). The high- level result of the study is that every dollar spent on GLRI projects between 2010 and 2015 will generate a total of $3.35 of additional economic activity through 2036. The final study, summary report, case studies, and other materials are online at https://www.glc.org/work/blue-economy/GLRI-economic-impact. A follow-up workshop was convened in July 2019 with the project team, advisory committee, and regional thought leaders to assess gaps and unmet needs related to the Blue Economy, and to establish a research and action agenda for future work in this area. A framing paper was prepared by John Austin with the

14

Michigan Economic Center and a workshop summary report was prepared. Drawing from recommendations provided at the workshop the GLC and the project team have prepared an Action Plan for the Great Lakes Blue Economy. The Action Plan recommends specific building blocks for sustaining and growing the Great Lakes Blue Economy. It is intended both as a roadmap for collective action and a challenge to regional leaders to strategically leverage the economic potential of the Great Lakes. The draft Action Plan has been completed, and pending approval by the GLC Board, staff will work with project partners to develop a plan for releasing it and taking next steps.

Funder(s): C.S. Mott Foundation, Wege Foundation, Joyce Foundation, Erb Family Foundation, Fund for Lake Michigan, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Partners: Council of Great Lakes Industries, Great Lakes Metro Chambers Coalition, Alliance for the Great Lakes, National Wildlife Federation-Great Lakes Regional Center, Michigan Office of the Great Lakes, and the University of Michigan Water Center.

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • The Action Plan has been finalized and GLC and the project team will be consulting on a plan for releasing it and taking next steps.

Lead Staff: Eric Brown, [email protected]

Coastal Conservation and Habitat Restoration

Objective: Conserve coastal ecosystem functions and values that contribute to the diversity, resilience, and economy of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River basin by protecting natural communities that sustain populations of desirable fish and wildlife species; restoring degraded areas; and managing coastal resources to improve ecosystem services while supporting sustainable economic development.

More information about the GLC’s coastal conservation and habitat restoration work can be found at www.glc.org/work/habitat.

Strategic Actions:

• Lead and support regional programs that restore, protect and manage valuable habitat and water resources through implementation of the NOAA-GLC Regional Partnership in Areas of Concern, and in coordination with U.S. EPA, NOAA, the states and provinces, and local organizations.

• Elevate awareness of coastal conservation issues among decision-makers, managers, researchers, and the public by convening meetings, coordinating action, and developing communication products such as websites, webinars, and publications.

• Explore and develop data and information-sharing opportunities to support ongoing coastal wetland restoration prioritization; contribute to decision-making; and measure progress on coastal conservation and habitat restoration across the region.

• Communicate with partners, including U.S. EPA, NOAA, USGS, NRCS, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Great Lakes Landscape Conservation Cooperative, and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement Annex 7 Subcommittee to ensure effective coordination and collaboration with state and provincial agencies, agriculture producers, conservation groups, and local partners in support of

15

sound land management practices and strategically targeted fish and wildlife restoration and conservation actions.

• Advocate for legislation and funding for federal programs, policies, and laws, such as the GLRI, Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act, and Farm Bill, and support their effective implementation and alignment with state and provincial priorities.

NOAA Regional Partnership to Support Habitat Restoration in Areas of Concern (AOCs) and Other Priority Coastal Areas

Overview: The GLC is leading two NOAA Regional Partnerships under the GLRI to support habitat restoration in Great Lakes AOCs and other priority coastal areas. The 2016 Regional Partnership is ongoing and has provided $10.3 million to support habitat restoration in the Muskegon Lake and Clinton River AOCs in Michigan; the Maumee and Cuyahoga River AOCs in Ohio; a socio-economic study on the impacts of restoration in the Muskegon Lake AOC; and communications about restoration work in Great Lakes AOCs. In 2019, the GLC was awarded an additional $7.9 million for priority projects under a new NOAA Regional Partnership Program. The awards under the new partnership will continue to address AOC needs in Michigan, Ohio, and in New York’s Niagara River AOC. Work under the partnership also expanded into priority coastal areas outside of AOCs with two projects in Michigan along Lake St. Clair and one project in Illinois near the Calumet River.

Funder(s): Funding is provided by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and U.S. EPA through a Regional Partnership between the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the GLC.

Partners: NOAA; U.S. EPA; Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy; Michigan Department of Natural Resources; West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission; Summit Metroparks; City of Toledo; Audubon Great Lakes; Chesterfield Township (Michigan); Ohio Department of Natural Resources; Forest Preserves of Cook County (Illinois); Ohio EPA; Huron Clinton Metroparks (Michigan); Macomb County (Michigan); Edsel and Eleanor Ford House (Michigan); Buffalo Urban Development Corporation (New York); New York Department of Environmental Conservation; City of Buffalo; Buffalo Niagara Waterkeeper; and the Ralph C. Wilson Jr. Foundation.

Schedule: The 2016 Regional Partnership is ongoing until December 2021. The 2019 Regional Partnership will continue until at least December 2022.

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Finalized engineering and design work for a project at the Cascade Valley Metropark on the Cuyahoga River in Ohio with funding from the 2016 Regional Partnership. Major construction was recently completed with funding from the 2019 Regional Partnership. The project has restored 50 acres of floodplain and 5,000 linear feet of the Cuyahoga River. Additional monitoring and outreach activities are planned for the coming year. • Continued implementation of five projects in the Muskegon Lake AOC, including work on planning for long-term restoration management, final construction, and ecological monitoring of previous activities. During 2020 significant construction activity was initiated on four of these final projects. Ecological monitoring activities were expanded with funds from cost savings and were completed during the summer with a final report recently completed. Final restoration activities on all projects will be completed by late 2021. • Completed the majority of construction of the Penn 7 project in the Maumee River AOC under the 2019 Regional Partnership. This project resulted in restoration of fish habitat, restoration of open

16

water and emergent wetland, and increased fish nursery habitat on a 59-acre parcel along the Maumee river. Additional monitoring and outreach activities are planned for 2021. • Completed final engineering and design for the Powderhorn Lake project near the Calumet River in Northeast Illinois. This project will re-establish a hydrologic connection between Powderhorn Lake and Wolf Lake to the north, and ultimately, to Lake Michigan. Bidding for construction is anticipated to take place in summer 2021. • Continued with the engineering and design phase of the Niagara River AOC Ralph C. Wilson Jr. Centennial Park Habitat Restoration Project. This project will improve shoreline and aquatic habitat along nearly one mile of the waterfront in the city of Buffalo where Lake Erie meets the head of the Niagara River. • Initiated a feasibility study for the Ford Cove Shoreline and Coastal Wetland Restoration Project under the 2019 Regional Partnership. This project will evaluate and plan for the restoration of degraded coastal wetland, nearshore, and shoreline habitat in a heavily developed section of Lake St. Clair. A contractor has been selected and field work will begin in the spring 2021. • Three additional projects have been developed and submitted for approval under Year 3 of the 2019 Regional Partnership. These projects include a feasibility study and engineering and design work at two locations in the Maumee River AOC and engineering and design as well as final construction at a priority Lake Ontario coastal area in New York.

Lead Staff: Eric Ellis, [email protected]

Great Lakes Coastal Assembly

Overview: The GLC was on the steering committee of the Upper Midwest and Great Lakes Landscape Conservation Cooperative (LCC) and participated in the Coastal Conservation Working Group. Funding for the LCC was eliminated in 2018 and the program has been dissolved. A group of partners, including multiple states and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, explored various opportunities to retain the benefits of the program and continue with many of the program goals, which led to the creation of the Great Lakes Coastal Assembly.

Funder(s): Currently very limited funding from non-GLC sources for meetings and logistics.

Partners: NOAA, U.S. EPA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Audubon Great Lakes, all 8 Great Lakes states, ECCC, USGS, ACOE, The Nature Conservancy (US and Canada), Ducks Unlimited, and many others.

Schedule: The steering committee has periodic conference calls and an annual meeting, otherwise activities are planned on an as-needed basis.

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • The GLC is actively taking part in Assembly activities and will continue to cooperate with partners on priority coastal issues and regularly scheduled meetings. Several working groups have been established. GLC staff sit on the Coastal Assembly Symposium working group and previously co- chaired the Coastal Wetlands Symposium working group.

Lead Staff: Eric Ellis, [email protected]

NOAA Great Lakes Habitat Restoration Grant to Support the St. Clair-Detroit River System (SCDRS) Coastal Restoration Initiative

17

Overview: The goal of this NOAA grant program is to provide financial and technical assistance to habitat restoration projects that meet both NOAA's mission to restore coastal habitats and support the GLRI goal to protect and restore habitats in order to sustain healthy populations of native fish species in the eight U.S. Great Lakes states. The GLC worked with a variety of partners to submit the St. Clair-Detroit River System Coastal Restoration Initiative proposal in March 2018.

Funders:

Partners: NOAA, Chesterfield Township, Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority, Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, Michigan Department of Natural Resources.

Schedule: The grant was awarded in August 2018 and has a three-year duration. A no-cost one year project extension will be requested in the summer 2021. • $1.624 million was awarded for two projects in 2018, which are currently being implemented. o Lake Erie Metropark Shoreline Restoration Project with the Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority in Wayne County, MI; 1,183 linear feet (lf) of hardened shoreline and 1.7 acres of Lake Erie coastal marsh will be restored by softening the shoreline and creating a network of shallow pools and channels within the coastal wetland. This project is in the final engineering and design phase with permits pending. An additional $39,750 was awarded to this project from the 2019 NOAA/GLC Regional Partnership to cover unexpected archeology permitting expenses. o Brandenburg Park Shoreline Restoration Engineering and Design project with Chesterfield Township in Macomb County, Michigan. This design process is complete and will lead to the eventual restoration of 740 lf of hardened shoreline and 1.5 acres of nearshore habitat at Lake St. Clair. • $715,000 in additional funding was awarded in August 2019 for year two implementation of the Brandenburg Park Shoreline Restoration project. Construction was initiated in the fall of 2020 and reached significant completion by spring 2021. Additional outreach and monitoring activities are planned for 2021.

Additional Program Activities

• GLC program staff continue to work on the next phase of assessing priority coastal habitat projects with our state and provincial delegations as a follow-up to previous state specific webinars. An ongoing list of restoration priorities is maintained by GLC staff and used to inform project implementation in the region. Multiple projects from this list are currently being implemented or being considered for funding during 2021.

• Program staff co-authored a Restoration Ecology journal article titled Restoration of rapids habitat in a Great Lakes connecting channel, the St. Marys River, Michigan. The article highlighted post- restoration monitoring results from the Little Rapids Project in the St. Marys River AOC which was funded by the NOAA/GLC 2013 Regional Partnership.

• Program staff attended and assisted with the organization of a federal agency working group to review and make recommendations on the restoration of nearshore habitat and reef systems.

18

Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention and Control

Objective: Prevent the introduction and spread, and when necessary, advance the management and control of aquatic invasive species, that are or have the potential to negatively impact water resources or the economy of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River basin.

More information can be found at https://www.glc.org/work/invasive-species.

Strategic Actions:

• Develop and promote communication products and services, including websites, webinars, and publications (e.g., Great Lakes Aquatic Invasions) that provide AIS information and advance progress on AIS prevention and control.

• Develop and promote the use of adaptive management frameworks and data and information integration platforms in order to support decision making (including evaluating costs and benefits) and measure progress on AIS prevention and control across the region.

• Facilitate regional forums and collaboratives working to advance effective and coordinated approaches to AIS prevention and control, including the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species, the Chicago Area Waterway System Advisory Committee, and the Great Lakes Phragmites and Invasive Mussel collaboratives, among others.

• Collaborate with other partner groups engaged in AIS prevention and control to support and advance common AIS priorities, including the GLWQA Annex 6 Subcommittee, the Conference of Great Lakes Governors and Premiers AIS Task Force, the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, the International Joint Commission, the federal Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, and other regional ANS panels, among others.

• Advocate for legislation and funding to support effective implementation of federal programs, policies and laws, such as the National Invasive Species Act, Lacey Act, GLRI, and Asian Carp Action Plan.

• Lead regional projects that advance policies and solutions to reduce the risk of AIS introduction and spread through priority pathways including internet sales of organisms in trade, canals and waterways and ballast water.

Projects

Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species

Overview: The federal Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 called on the GLC to convene a panel of Great Lakes agencies and private, environmental, tribal and commercial interests to identify priorities for the Great Lakes region (including the eight Great Lakes states) with respect to nonindigenous aquatic invasive species (AIS); make recommendations to the national Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force (ANSTF) regarding its own program initiatives; assist the ANSTF in coordinating federal aquatic nuisance species program activities in the Great Lakes; coordinate non-federal programs within the region; provide advice to public and private individuals and entities concerning methods of controlling AIS; and report to the ANSTF on activities within the Great Lakes related to AIS prevention, research and control.

19

Funder(s): U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Partners: Great Lakes Panel (GLP) members: https://www.glc.org/work/glpans/members

Schedule: Ongoing

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Hosted a virtual fall GLP meeting in November 2020 in place of an in-person meeting. • Initiated planning for a virtual spring GLP meeting in June 2021. • Continued planning for a symposium on the organisms in trade pathway, including a series of virtual information sessions on the topic for industry, natural resource managers, and conservation law enforcement to be held in conjunction with the virtual spring GLP meeting. • Completed review and finalized the GLP statement of regional AIS priorities through a series of meetings with GLP standing committee members. • Participated on two ANSTF committees implementing the ANSTF Strategic Plan, as well as a committee to review bylaws for the ANSTF. • Developed and submitted recommendations for the ANSTF, recommending the U.S. EPA pursue full funding for their Great Lakes Lake Champlain Invasive Species Program. • Developed and submitted comments on the regional Great Lakes Ballast Water Research and Development Plan under VIDA. • Developed a new three-year work plan for the GLP, covering activities in 2021-2024 with a focus on genetic biocontrol tools, the organisms in trade pathway, and the recreational boating pathway. • Upcoming work includes a literature review of priority established aquatic plants and initiating planning for a managers’ workshop on research gaps and management needs identified in the review, beginning in late spring 2021. • Additional upcoming work will initiate a review and redevelopment of the existing GLP website, to better serve the purpose of the GLP, its role in the region, and to integrate the information in Great Lakes Aquatic Invasions booklet into a more accessible online format.

Lead Staff: Erika Jensen, [email protected]

Invasive Mussel Collaborative

Overview: The Invasive Mussel Collaborative (IMC) is working to advance scientifically sound technology for invasive mussel control to produce measurable ecological and economic benefits. The IMC provides a framework for communication and coordination and is identifying the needs and objectives of resource managers; prioritizing the supporting science; implementing communication strategies; and aligning science and management goals into a common agenda for invasive mussel control

Funder(s): U.S. Geological Survey via the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative

Partners: U.S. Geological Survey, Great Lakes Commission, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission

Schedule: Ongoing (Five-year agreement with USGS through 2023; current funding through May 31, 2020)

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Produced a video summarizing the invasive mussel control project on Good Harbor Reef.

20

• Continued to support two work groups surrounding priority issues identified at the September 2019 annual meeting. • Established a process for invasive mussel research coordination and prioritization under the Research Work Group. • Continued to develop and improve a summary document of available control methods and associated literature, case studies, and permitting information. • Worked with the U.S. FWS to develop protocols and procedures for disposal of invasive mussel- infested moss balls sold at aquarium shops. • Hosted two webinars, the first discussing approaches and guidance for socially-distance boater interactions in accordance with COVID-19 safety guidelines, and the second reviewing recent invasive mussel control studies. • Maintained an active communication network, including a comprehensive website, email list with over 400 subscribers, and a biweekly newsletter.

Lead Staff: Erika Jensen, [email protected]

Great Lakes Phragmites Collaborative

Overview: The GLC and USGS are jointly leading a regional partnership – the Great Lakes Phragmites Collaborative (GLPC) – to improve communication and collaboration leading to more coordinated, efficient and strategic approaches to non-native Phragmites across the Great Lakes basin. The GLPC provides educational resources tailored to diverse interest groups, connects invasive species managers with the latest research and technology, encourages the use of adaptive management, and facilitates alignment of partner efforts across jurisdictional barriers.

Funder(s): U.S. Geological Survey via the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative

Partners: U.S. Geological Survey

Schedule: Ongoing (Five-year agreement with USGS through 2023; current funding through May 31, 2021)

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Prepared a communications plan to distribute the GLPC Common Agenda in fall 2020. • Established a process to evaluate the progress of the GLPC. • Regularly convened an Advisory Committee to guide the work of the GLPC and foster inter- jurisdictional partnerships. • Hosted an ongoing webinar series where guest speakers shared successful models for Phragmites management, public outreach, and collaborative governance. • Convened the Phragmites Symbiosis Collaborative, a forum for researchers to share and collaborate on their microbial or genetic research. • Planned a Phragmites symposium at the Upper Midwest Invasive Species Conference with invited speakers from across the Great Lakes. • Updated the GLPC website (www.greatlakesphragmites.net) to meet the needs to our stakeholders. • Distributing a biweekly newsletter that shares news, upcoming events, and relevant information to Phragmites management. • Developed audience-specific outreach materials across various multi-media formats.

Lead Staff: Samantha Tank, [email protected]

21

Phragmites Adaptive Management Framework (PAMF)

Overview: The GLC and USGS are working to promote effective Phragmites management across the Great Lakes basin and track the effectiveness and resource efficiency of those management activities through the PAMF model. PAMF is available to Phragmites managers across the basin, from state and federal employees to private citizens, in a strategic attempt to engage, learn from, and assist all levels of Phragmites managers.

Funder(s): U.S. Geological Survey via the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

Partners: U.S. Geological Survey and University of Georgia.

Schedule: Ongoing (Five-year agreement with USGS through 2023; current funding through May 31, 2021).

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Maintained ongoing communication with USGS and program partners to effectively coordinate efforts. • Prepared a communications plan to distribute the strategic plan fall 2020. • Prepared abstracts for presentations at upcoming conferences. • Distributed PAMF newsletters featuring a blog post and upcoming events. • Updated the PAMF Web Hub (https://www.ismtrack.org/pamf/) to improve the user experience and ensure the collection of high-quality management data. • Adapted the 2020/21 outreach plan to shift all planned in-person engagement to a remote format and included offering two remote training sessions, monitoring assistance and video assistance. • Published a virtual learning experience for PAMF participants that includes recorded presentations, helpful guides, FAQ documents, and quizzes all structured in easy-to-follow modules (https://www.greatlakesphragmites.net/pamf/training/). • Distributed the first Annual Management Unit Summary documents that provide an annual progress report of Phragmites management efforts for each management unit enrolled in PAMF. • Developing an alternative management guidance structure that will make PAMF guidance more achievable to a portion of participants. • Enrolling new management units for the 2021/2022 PAMF cycle year.

Lead Staff: Samantha Tank, [email protected].

Interstate Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention, Early Detection, and Response (Phase III)

Overview: The GLC is supporting the eight Great Lakes states in their efforts to plan and coordinate interstate aquatic invasive species (AIS) prevention, early detection, and response activities. During the third phase of this effort, the GLC will work with the interstate team to review existing communication plans and protocols related to AIS surveillance and response, and use lessons learned from previous response exercises to develop a draft plan for communication of surveillance data and response actions. The GLC will also be coordinating a response exercise with a focus on communications under different scenario conditions (e.g., different taxa, multijurisdictional waters).

Funder(s): U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through Michigan EGLE under the GLRI

Partners: Michigan EGLE, The Nature Conservancy, and other state, provincial and federal agencies

22

Schedule: October 2018 through June 2021

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Convened a virtual meeting of project team members to present options for formalizing the regional communications plan. • Finalized the regional communications plan to be used with the existing response framework developed as part of Phase II of this project. • Integrated the communications plan into the existing surveillance and response plans developed under previous phases of this project.

Lead Staff: Ceci Weibert, [email protected]

Interstate Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention, Early Detection, and Response (Phase IV)

Overview: The GLC is supporting the eight Great Lakes states in their efforts to plan and coordinate interstate aquatic invasive species (AIS) prevention, early detection, and response activities. During the third phase of this effort, the GLC will work with the interstate team to expand and improve the existing regional surveillance framework and to develop best practice guidance for aquatic plant surveillance. The GLC will also be coordinating the development of an enhanced web interface to support regional prevention, early detection, and response activities.

Funder(s): U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the GLRI

Partners: The Nature Conservancy and other state, provincial and federal agencies

Schedule: January 2021 to June 2023

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Coordinated and hosted a virtual Great Lakes regional surveillance coordination meeting. • Upcoming work includes assisting The Nature Conservancy in planning and holding a series of workshops to improve and refine the Great Lakes surveillance site prioritization system.

Lead Staff: Ceci Weibert, [email protected]

Great Lakes Detector of Invasive Aquatics in Trade

Overview: GLC developed the web-based software tool Great Lakes Detector of Invasive Aquatics in Trade (GLDIATR), which collects, analyzes and allows users to access information about how many and what types of Great Lakes AIS are available for sale on the Internet. This information is being used by invasive species managers to inform and help target a variety of activities, including outreach and education, risk assessment, monitoring and surveillance, and enforcement.

Funder(s): U.S. EPA under the GLRI, Michigan DNR, Wisconsin DNR

Partners: State, provincial and federal AIS managers

Schedule: May 2016 to April 2021

23

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Provided sale information at the request of managers and other partners. • Investigating functionality of novel web tools in the marketplace and potential role in assisting collection, analysis, and dissemination of Great Lakes AIS information. • Identified third-party web scraping tools that may be used to support GLDIATR and contracted with those companies to support project activities.

Lead Staff: Erika Jensen, [email protected].

Blue Accounting – Aquatic Invasive Species

Overview: The GLC is leading the AIS Issue under the Blue Accounting Initiative. The issue focused on providing regional data and information on efforts to: stop species introduction and spread through priority pathways including live trade and recreational boating; Implement a targeted, binational program to detect new species; and control populations of harmful invasive species across the region.

Funder(s): C.S. Mott Foundation, Joyce Foundation, Herrick Foundation

Partners: The Nature Conservancy and regional AIS experts and managers through the Blue Accounting AIS work group

Schedule: Ongoing

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Contributed to management of the overall Blue Accounting initiative • Held webinars with the Blue Accounting AIS work group in December 2020 and February 2021 • Developed a prototype dashboard related to the organisms in trade (OIT) pathway to track progress on regional consistency in regulatory policies. • Participated in refining the prototype web platform for Blue Accounting 2.0 • Upcoming activities include refining the OIT dashboard with guidance from the work group, and scoping development of data visualizations to track progress on the control of established species.

Lead Staff: Ceci Weibert, [email protected]

Additional AIS Program Activities

• Continued support for the annual “AIS landing blitz” event that was held in June-July 2020 and finalized an event summary fact sheet and story map to educate boaters, anglers and other recreational users on steps they can take to prevent the movement of AIS (https://www.glc.org/work/blitz). Lead staff: Ceci Weibert • Participated as a member of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement Annex 6 (AIS) Subcommittee. Lead staff: Erika Jensen • Participated on the Chicago Area Waterway System (CAWS) Aquatic Invasive Species Stakeholder Group and Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee. Lead staff: Erika Jensen

24

Information Management and Blue Accounting

Objective: Develop and maintain mutually beneficial relationships with agencies and entities across the region in both nations at federal, state, provincial, tribal/First Nations, local, and municipal scales to coordinate information management and provide information to the GLC for use by its member states and provinces have access to high-quality, curated information about Great Lakes issues from a neutral and authoritative source.

More information on the GLC’s information management and Blue Accounting work is available at www.glc.org/work/info-management.

Strategic Actions:

• Deliver consistent, continuous, and unbiased information to the GLC’s member states and provinces on issues and outcomes of mutual interest and concern, including the support of other GLC Program Areas described in the Strategic Plan.

• Establish Blue Accounting as the leading information service to track the region’s progress toward shared goals and outcomes using consistent data, metrics, and methods working with The Nature Conservancy and other partners in both countries. Specifically, provide support to the Source Water Initiative and ErieStat, described in the Water Quality Program Area, as Blue Accounting pilot projects.

• Develop and maintain mutually beneficial relationships with agencies and entities across the region in both nations at federal, state, provincial, tribal/First Nations, local, and municipal scales to coordinate information management and provide information to the GLC for use by its members.

• Support and enhance the efforts of Annex 10 of the GLWQA, the IJC’s Science Priority Committee and the Great Lakes Advisory Board’s Science and Information Subcommittee to improve information coordination and flow between entities and agencies in the Great Lakes region.

• Coordinate and provide information to support spill prevention and response programs working with U.S. EPA across the Great Lakes basin and continuing current work with the Region 5 Regional Response Team to build intergovernmental relationships that improve planning and make response efforts more efficient.

• Provide facilitation and information management services to support development of strategies and policies to ensure protection of the region’s water resources in the context of increases in North American oil production and associated oil transportation to and through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region.

Projects

Blue Accounting Initiative

Overview: Following an October 2019 resolution by the GLC, in 2020 GLC staff completed the pilot phase of Blue Accounting, conducted in partnership with The Nature Conservancy. The GLC now stands as the long- term home of Blue Accounting and staff have been working with the Board and collaborative work groups to refresh Blue Accounting into an improved information service tracking the region’s progress toward shared goals for the Great Lakes. A new website is under development to replace the pilot’s

25

www.blueaccounting.org. A phased approach over the summer of 2021 will move ErieStat and AIS pilot content into the new website with efforts underway to meet the needs of high-level appointed and elected leaders in the basin. Additional funds have been secured to refresh the Source Water pilot issue into a broader approach addressing drinking water. In the future, similar refreshes of the Maritime Transportation and Coastal Wetlands issue are planned.

Funder(s): The Nature Conservancy, The Herrick Foundation; The Fred A. and Barbara M. Erb Family Foundation; The Joyce Foundation.

Partners: Great Lakes states, provinces, and the federal governments of the U.S. and Canada

Schedule: Ongoing

Recent and Upcoming Activities: • Jurisdiction briefings began in April 2021, allowing GLC delegations to gather colleagues and learn about the new Blue Accounting and discuss ways states and provinces can help. • Discussions continue toward the re-establishment of an Advisory Committee to guide Blue Accounting’s current Steering Committee (the GLC Board). • ErieStat and AIS content will be transferred to the new site in June 2021. • Pending the availability of funding, other Issues will be phased in later in 2021, with integration into GLC operations starting in 2022.

Lead Staff: Nicole Zacharda, [email protected]

Inland Sensitivity Atlas (Area Contingency Planning)

Overview: GLC staff maintain the Inland Sensitivity Atlas (ISA) data for the states of Michigan, Ohio and Indiana under a contract with U.S. EPA Region 5. The ISA is a set of GIS layers delivered through a web mapping application, providing contingency planners and emergency responders with accurate and relevant sensitive information for spill preparedness and response. In addition to the ISA mapping, GLC staff also work on contingency planning with U.S. EPA Region 5 On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) and local agencies to develop plans in three Indiana subareas: the Patoka River Planning Area supporting the Patoka River National Wildlife Refuge and Management Area; the White River sub-area planning area, which consists of five counties, including and upstream of Indianapolis; and the Northwest Indiana Planning Area, which includes the watersheds touching Lake Michigan in three Indiana counties. A goal of this activity is to develop best practices for sub-area plans throughout the Great Lakes states. The GLC works closely with OSCs and U.S. EPA Planners to develop map products, datasets, and documents supporting contingency planning within the region. GLC also participates in semi-annual meetings for Region 5’s Regional Response Team (RRT).

Funder(s): U.S. EPA Region 5

Partners: Region 5 Regional Response Team (RRT), Upper Mississippi River basin Association (UMRBA) in Minnesota, and TetraTech, Inc.

Schedule: Ongoing since 2001; current period October 2018 through September 2023. Recent and Upcoming Activities:

26

• Attended meetings and worked on contingency planning for the Western Lake Erie and Patoka River Planning Areas and the Northwest Indiana sub-areas. Participated in quarterly Inland Riverine Oil Spill (IROS) and Region 5 Mapping group meetings. • Finished updating the Indiana ISA data and currently updating the Michigan data for incorporation into the regional ISA geodatabase. Identifying additional datasets that can improve the ISA, such as Important Bird Areas, ceded territories where tribes hold treaty rights, and natural resources that are culturally important to Great Lakes region tribes, like manoomin (wild rice) stands. • Attended the most recent (remote) meeting of the Region 5 RRT in October 2020 and participated in the Science and Technology and Planning subcommittees. Attended the February 2021 RRT PFAS webinar.

Lead Staff: Amanda Grimm, [email protected]

27

Policy Coordination and Advocacy

Great Lakes Commission 2021 Federal Priorities

The GLC’s 2021 federal policy priorities were released in conjunction with the annual Great Lakes Day event, held virtually on Mach 3, 2021. The 2021 statement, Building a Better Basin: Revitalizing and Protecting the Great Lakes Environment and Economy, will guide the GLC’s advocacy activities over the coming year. The top priorities for 2021 are:

• Invest in water infrastructure to protect drinking water, rebuild failing wastewater systems, and support community health and redevelopment. • Support federal, tribal, first nation, state, and local actions to ensure the economy and environment of the Great Lakes region are resilient to the adverse impacts of a changing climate. • Strengthen the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River navigation system to keep waterways open to commerce. • Fully fund the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative to maintain progress in restoring North America’s greatest freshwater resource. • Invest in approaches that will stop the introduction and spread of aquatic invasive species. • Strengthen agricultural and other conservation programs to protect water quality, reduce nutrient pollution, enhance wildlife habitat and bolster the economy. • Invest in binational efforts to track progress toward regional goals.

As in recent years, the GLC also partnered with a number of regional agencies and organization on a joint statement of common regional priorities. These priorities are consistent with those presented in the GLC’s statement and help demonstrate broad-based support for key priorities for the Great Lakes.

Virtual Great Lakes Day

The GLC’s 2021 Great Lakes Day Virtual Reception drew record attendance from the Great Lakes stakeholder community. The annual event, co-hosted by the GLC and the Northeast-Midwest Institute, drew more than 300 Great Lakes leaders to hear seven speakers from the U.S. Congress and the Canadian Parliament.

Great Lakes Day 2021 congressional speakers included:

U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow – Michigan U.S. Senator Todd Young – Indiana U.S. Representative Debbie Dingell – Michigan U.S. Representative Bill Huizenga – Michigan U.S. Representative Dave Joyce – Ohio U.S. Representative Marcy Kaptur – Ohio Mr. Vance Badawey, MP – Niagara Ontario

FY 2021 Appropriations

The following table presents final FY 2020 appropriations (in millions of dollars) for selected Great Lakes programs, the President’s budget request for FY 2021, and final Congressional action on FY 2021 appropriations. Omnibus appropriations legislation was signed into law on December 27, 2020.

28

Updated January 14, 2020

FY 2020 Final FY 2021 Final FY 2021 House Actions to Date Senate Actions to Omnibus Program Appropriations Budget Request on FY 2021 Date on FY 2021 Appropriations (in (in millions (in millions USD) Appropriations* Appropriations* millions USD) USD) No detail provided No detail provided No detail provided ($37m for all ($37m for all Great Lakes Environmental ($37m for all Ocean, $8.6 No detail provided Ocean, Coastal, Ocean, Coastal, Research Lab Coastal, and Great and Great Lakes and Great Lakes Lakes Research) Research) Research) Chicago Sanitary Canal $14.3 $14.3 $13.9 $14.3 $14.3 Dispersal Barrier $244 Great Lakes $1,680 Harbor Maintenance Trust $1,630 ($146 (incl. $123 for Soo $1,680 Fund Great Lakes) $1,678 lock construction) USACE Workplan-Great $146 N/A $151 Lakes Funding Report language Report language GLMRIS Brandon Road recognizes IL and recognizes IL and Study-Pre-construction $.05 $.05 MI contributions to MI contributions to Engineering and Design PED PED Report language Urges USACE to Great Lakes Coastal No detail No detail provided No detail provided urges USACE to prioritize study Resilience Study (USACE) provided prioritize this study Report language Report language Great Lakes/Miss River $.2 $.05 urges USACE to urges USACE to Interbasin Study prioritize this study prioritize this study Soo Lock Construction $1251 $123 $123 $123 $123.22 Clean Water State Revolving $1,639 $1,639 $1,639 $1,119 $1,639 Fund Drinking Water State $1,126 $1,126 $1,126 $863 $1,126 Revolving Fund Great Lakes Restoration $320 $330 $320 $320 $335 Initiative Report language directs the Agency Great Lakes and Lake to submit an Champlain Invasive Species No detail No detail provided No detail provided implementation Program plan for fiscal year 2021 within 180 days of enactment BEACH Grants $9.5 $0 Great Lakes Science Center $11.8 No detail provided Section 106 Water Pollution $223 $230 $223 $153 Control Sec. 319 Non-Point Source $176 $177 Pollution State/Tribal $172 $0 $188 Assistance Grants Great Lakes Fishery $47 $47 $47 $21 $44.682 Commission Great Lakes Fishery $0 No detail provided $0 Ecosystem Rest. National Sea Grant College $76 $75 $74 $0 $71 Program No detail provided ($3.5 million for $2 million for Regional Great Lakes Tributary $0 Regional Sediment Sediment Management Modeling Program (USACE) Management Program Program) Coastal Zone Management $78.5 $78.5 $77 $0 $78 Grants

29

Water Infrastructure Finance $60 $65 $60 $25 $71 and Innovation Program Port Infrastructure $200 $230 $225 $0 $300 Development Program USFWS Asian carp activities $25 $9.8 $25 $25 $25 USGS Asian carp research $10.62 $5.6 $10.62 $10.62 $10.62 Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife $1.9 $1.68 $1.35 $1 Restoration Act (USF&WS) New Great Lakes Icebreaker $4

Construction Great Lakes St. Lawrence $38 Seaway Development $38 Corporation Coronavirus-Related Fishery $15 Disaster Assistance (Great Lakes) WRDA Status – 116

WRDA Overview – 116th Congress

The House and Senate included the Water Resources Development Act of 2020 in its omnibus appropriations legislation, which was signed into law on 12/27/2020.

The bill includes several GLC priorities, including: • Brandon Road o Adjusted cost-share to 80% federal, 20% non-federal: . Federal: $557,730,550 . Non-Federal: $300,316,450 . Total: $858,047,000 o Authorizes inclusion of technologies or measures not described in the report • Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund o Allows special treatment for appropriations up to the sum of: 1) HMTF tax and interest deposits two years prior, plus, 2) an additional amount designated in the WRDA legislation as follows: . $500 million in FY2021, . $600 million in FY2022, . $700 million in FY2023 . $100 million upward adjustment annually until reaching $1.5 billion in FY2030. o Great Lakes set-aside at a minimum 13% of annual expenditures • Great Lakes Coastal Resiliency Study o Reiterates authorization from WRDA 2016 o Prioritizes ecosystem protection and restoration; prevention and control of invasive species and the effects of invasive species; and recreation associated with water resources development projects o Prioritizes actions necessary to protect critical public infrastructure, communities, and critical natural or cultural resources • Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation o Renames the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation to include “Great Lakes” in the title, better reflecting the role of the agency • Harmful Algal Blooms o The Secretary shall carry out a demonstration program to determine the causes of, and implement measures to effectively detect, prevent, treat, and eliminate, harmful algal blooms associated with water resources development projects.

30

o Demonstration program will include activities in the Great Lakes • Great Lakes Confined Disposal Facilities o Authorizes relocation of access to the Port of Cleveland confined disposal facility for placement of USACE dredged material • Aquatic Invasive Species Research o Amended Section 1108 of WRDA 2018 to: . Prioritize prevention and management; . Include research on elodea and quagga mussels; and o Includes research specific to the Great Lakes (in addition to Pacific, Arctic, and Gulf Coasts)

2020 National Defense Authorization Act/Coast Guard Authorization Act/Maritime Administration Authorization

The House and Senate passed the conference report of the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act on December 11, 2020. It was vetoed by the president on December 23, 2020. The House and Senate each passed resolutions overriding the presidential veto on December 28, 2020 and January 1, 2021, respectively. The bill became law on January 1, 2021.

This bill includes several GLC priorities, including: • Icebreaking o Authorizes $160 million for FY2021 for a new Great Lakes icebreaker • MARAD grant program o Establishes a new grant program to assist ports and others in the maritime industry that have experience natural disasters and public health emergencies o Eligible applicants include port authorities, state and tribal governments, and private sector companies involved in maritime transportation • Port Infrastructure Development Grants o Reauthorizes this MARAD program at $750 million o Establishes a small-port set-aside equivalent to 18% of annual funding • PFAS o Authorizes $25 million for replacement of aqueous fire-fighting foam (AFFF) containing Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) o Authorizes $25 million for development of PFAS remediation and disposal technology o Establishes a research prize for development of non-PFAS-containing fire-fighting agents and authorizes up to $5 million for awards o Establishes an interagency body on research related to PFAS, including: . EPA, NIEHS, ATSDR, NSF, DoD, NIH, NIST, Interior, Transportation, Homeland Security, NASA, USDA, USGS, DOE, OIRA, and OMB. o Prohibits DoD procurement of items containing PFOS or PFOA o Requires notification to agricultural operations located in areas exposed to DoD PFAS use

Standing Committee on Climate Resilience

• Following discussion of a proposed resolution related to climate change during the 2019 Annual Meeting in Québec City, Chair Jackson appointed a Special Committee on Climate Resilience to develop a list of action items for the GLC to consider related to climate resilience. The Special Committee met four times between November 2019 and January 2020 and was facilitated by Kearns & West.

31

• On January 31, 2020, the GLC unanimously approved the Special Committee’s recommendations to appoint a Standing Committee on Climate Resilience and adopt a draft Framework for Action to continue work related to climate resilience. • The Standing Committee on Climate resilience convened for the first time on April 13, 2020 and has continued to meet on a regular schedule in order to address the recommended actions included in the Framework for Action adopted by the GLC in January. • The Standing Committee adopted a common definition of resilience to recommend to the GLC. • The Standing Committee has begun to meet with other stakeholder groups to leverage experience/expertise and to socialize initial committee work. • The Standing Committee has begun work to develop an action plan on climate resilience and has received technical assistance from NOAA in developing and employing a logic-model framework to organize the action plan. • The Standing Committee shared its draft logic model templates with Observers and other stakeholders prior to the GLC 2020 Annual Meeting, outlining four primary goals and the outcomes, actions, and outputs that would help achieve those goals. The Committee received feedback on those drafts, which it has incorporated into its ongoing work. • The Standing Committee is working to adapt the logic models into a draft action plan, which it will also share with Observers and stakeholders to solicit feedback.

32

Strategic Plan for the Great Lakes Commission 2017 – 2022

ADOPTED JANUARY 2017

Introduction The Great Lakes Commission is a public agency established by the Great Lakes Basin Compact in 1955 to help its Member states speak with a unified voice and collectively fulfill their vision for a healthy, vibrant Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River region. The Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec joined the Commission as associate members via a Declaration of Partnership in 1999. The Compact created the Commission to implement its terms and requirements, as noted in Article I:

1. To promote the orderly, integrated, and comprehensive development, use, and conservation of the water resources of the Great Lakes Basin.

2. To plan 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.

3. To make it possible for the states of the Basin and their people to derive the maximum benefit from utilization of public works, in the form of navigational aids or otherwise, which may exist or which may be constructed from time to time.

4. To advise 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.

Collectively, these terms and the rest of the Compact consistently speak to the intertwining of economic uses of water resources, conservation and the creation of an organization to lead a path that strikes a balance among multiple uses.

Vision The Great Lakes Commission is 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.

Mission The Great Lakes Commission represents, advises and assists its member 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 the balanced and sustainable use of Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River basin water resources.

1 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE GREAT LAKES COMMISSION

Values The following core values guide the work of the Great Lakes Commission and set the standards that we aspire to achieve in serving our member states and provinces.

 Member led: We are guided by and serve the common interests of our member states and provinces.  Regional perspective: We bring a regional perspective to federal, state and provincial programs, policies, projects and priorities.  Leadership: We are ambassadors for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River region and serve as liaisons within and beyond the region.  Collaboration: We advance our objectives in close coordination with the Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers, the International Joint Commission, the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, and constant dialogue with other regional institutions and relevant entities.  Partnerships: We respect the roles of other regional institutions and agencies and collaborate to achieve common goals and interests.  Transparency: We are open and transparent in carrying out our work.  Integrity: We strive for the highest levels of honesty, credibility and accuracy in the information, recommendations and perspectives that we convey.  Objective: We are nonpartisan, balanced and science-based in our work, while promoting a vision of a healthy environment and vibrant economy, pursued by each of our member states and provinces.  Open-minded: We are inclusive and welcome diverse views.  Sustainability: We incorporate principles of sustainable development and adaptive management in our work.

Core Competencies The Great Lakes Commission is uniquely equipped to serve its member states and provinces with the following core services, which constitute the skills, knowledge base, professional competencies and leadership attributes that are applied across all of its program areas. The core competencies are how the Commission conducts its work to achieve its goals, fulfill its mission and advance its vision.

Communications and Outreach: The Commission raises awareness; communicates with federal, state/provincial, and local agencies and stakeholders; and provides information technologies and outreach services to support effective decision-making and stewardship.

Information Management and Delivery: The Commission collects, integrates and makes accessible high quality and unbiased data and information to enable its member jurisdictions and other parties to develop sound policies, manage and adapt programs, and make informed decisions affecting the water resources of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River region.

Facilitation and Consensus Building: The Commission facilitates, convenes and participates in forums that address issues of interest to its members. By serving as a neutral broker of information and research and facilitating dialogue among diverse perspectives, it helps build consensus on solutions to challenges and opportunities facing Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River water resources.

Policy Coordination and Advocacy: The Commission helps its member states and provinces speak with a common voice by coordinating, analyzing, advising, communicating and advocating shared policy priorities. The Commission also collaborates with other regional, national and international organizations to advance common interests.

2 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE GREAT LAKES COMMISSION

Regional Project Management: The Commission secures resources and coordinates activities that address common interests of its member jurisdictions and provides the capacity to manage projects and administer funding to member states, provinces and other partners to advance shared goals.

Program Areas The Great Lakes Commission designs the work of its programs to support its goals and vision. The Goals articulate general outcomes we hope to achieve through our collective work across all Program Areas. Each of the Program Areas includes one Objective and, under each, a series of Strategic Actions that indicate what the Commission seeks to accomplish, while recognizing that the Commission’s work alone will not completely fulfill these Objectives. The strategic actions reflect what the Commission does and the projects and activities the Commission will undertake to address its goals, objectives and fulfill its mission over the next five years.

Goals The Great Lakes Commission’s goals articulate the outcomes it seeks to advance over the five-year timeframe of its strategic plan by building on its mission and vision and working in partnership with its member states and provinces and other entities.

 Businesses, communities and agriculture leverage water resources as assets to support strong economies and a high quality of life for residents.

 Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River water resources are protected from pollution and impacts from climate change; are accessible to people; provide high quality drinking water; and are managed in a balanced and sustainable manner for the benefit of current and future generations.

 Aquatic habitats support diverse and healthy fish and wildlife populations, are protected from the negative impacts of aquatic invasive species, and provide cultural and economic benefits to local communities.

 Harbors and waterways support recreational uses and a Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River maritime transportation system that efficiently moves goods and enhances the competitiveness of the region’s economy and international trade.

1. Water Quality

Challenges and Opportunities:

The Great Lakes basin’s abundant supply of clean, fresh water is vital to the regional economy and the health of its communities. Recognizing this, federal, state and provincial laws have been designed to ensure that water quality is sufficient to allow for a safe and sustainable public water supply, water-dependent economic activities, agriculture, healthy fish and wildlife populations, and water-related tourism and recreation. Additionally, water quality is increasingly linked to water quantity, in particular as governments address the threat of climate change. With expert knowledge of water issues and strong relationships with water quality practitioners across many sectors, the Commission is well-positioned to identify and share innovative solutions to water quality challenges, and to advance regional approaches to water quality protection and improvement. The Commission will utilize its expertise and capacity to maximize its members’ collective impact to improve and protect water quality in urban and urbanizing areas; in rural and agricultural areas; and other diverse stakeholders within sub-watersheds across the basin.

Objective: Identify, promote, and share innovative solutions to water quality challenges in both urban and rural settings, and advance approaches that encourage collective action to protect and improve water quality across diverse landscapes within watersheds.

3 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE GREAT LAKES COMMISSION

Strategic Actions:

 Protect and improve water quality by: leading and partnering on projects; facilitating dialogue and building consensus; and delivering information that improves the region’s ability to measure progress on water quality protection and improvement. Lead the ErieStat project to track progress toward the shared goal of reducing phosphorus into western Lake Erie by 40% by 2025 and begin a drinking water supply pilot as part of the Blue Accounting initiative.

 Protect and improve water quality in urban and urbanizing areas by leading and partnering on green infrastructure projects and related activities, such as the Green Infrastructure Technology Transfer Collaborative, that can create enabling conditions to restore the fractured water cycle.

 Protect and improve water quality in rural and agricultural areas by leading and partnering on projects and activities that reduce sediment and nutrient loads into Great Lakes basin waters through ongoing partnerships with NRCS, conservation districts, authorities and agricultural interests. Work will range from administering funds to reduce sediment and nutrient runoff to leading or supporting projects that advance traditional and innovative approaches to manage sediment and nutrient loading in Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) priority watersheds and watershed-based solutions across the basin.

 Explore opportunities to support the states and provinces in tackling complex aspects of water quality, including water quality trading and other market-based approaches, leveraging the region’s abundant clean fresh water assets to advance more sustainable methods of agricultural production, and linking urban/urbanizing landscapes with rural/agricultural landscapes to improve water quality across entire watersheds.

 Support the states and provinces in planning and adapting to water quality implications of climate change.

 Address critical water quality challenges, such harmful algal blooms, by facilitating regional forums, including collaboratives, such as the Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) Collaboratory, and participating in others, such as the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement’s annexes, to build consensus around shared water quality goals and associated solutions to achieve those goals.

 Advocate for refinements to U.S. federal policy and legislation to protect and improve water quality, including the U.S. Clean Water Act, the U.S. Safe Drinking Water Act, the U.S. Water Resources Development Act, and the U.S. Farm Bill.

2. Water Management and Infrastructure

Challenges and Opportunities:

Strengthening the effective management of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River basin water resources to meet the needs of the region’s citizens continues to be a top priority of Great Lakes governors and premiers. Due to its history, mandate and expertise the Great Lakes Commission is uniquely qualified to lead and support efforts in this area, and has already assisted the Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers in implementing the regional water resources agreements. At the local level, aging and degraded water infrastructure (drinking, storm and wastewater) is increasingly threatening communities’ access to this valuable freshwater resource. Water and wastewater infrastructure challenges are exacerbated by climate change impacts, such as increased runoff caused by more severe and frequent storm events, that often lead to increased flooding, sanitary and storm sewer overflows, and risks to public health and the health of the Great Lakes. The Commission has supported innovative projects focused on maximizing investments in water conservation and green infrastructure to support water management, and is working to establish new partnerships, identify new solutions to water infrastructure challenges, develop tools to support decision-making, and better manage data and information in these areas. Additionally, the Commission’s advocacy program continues to promote federal programs, policies and funding to help states, provinces and local communities

4 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE GREAT LAKES COMMISSION

manage water infrastructure. As water quantity and quality issues are inextricably linked, the Commission’s work in this area complements efforts under the water quality program area.

Objective: Ensure that the waters of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River basin continue to support the needs of communities, businesses, industries and ecology; are protected from development impacts, pollution, climate change and other stressors; and are managed in a balanced and sustainable manner for the use, benefit and enjoyment of people today and future generations.

Strategic Actions:

 In partnership with the Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers, support decision-making and measure progress under the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water Resources Agreement and Water Resources Compact by compiling, interpreting and disseminating consistent water withdrawal, diversion and consumptive use information; supporting the cumulative impact assessment called for under the Compact and the Agreement; and providing information on regional trends and state and provincial programs, practices and policies related to water use and conservation.

 Lead and engage in the development and dissemination of data and information necessary for implementing drinking, storm and wastewater management programs that identify critical needs and advance solutions to the benefit of public health and safety, water infrastructure and delivery, ecosystem health and water quality.

 Identify and advance solutions to water management and infrastructure challenges by facilitating forums, initiatives and partnerships including the Commission’s working group on water infrastructure.

 Raise awareness of the fundamental value of water and the need for infrastructure improvements by advocating for federal legislation and funding to support and accelerate drinking, storm and wastewater infrastructure improvements through the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund programs and other water management programs and by promoting the benefits of integrating water delivery and wastewater management services to the states, provinces and municipalities in the region.

3. Commercial Navigation

Challenges and Opportunities:

The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River maritime transportation system is vital to the economies of the United States and Canada. The system facilitates domestic and international trade through the movement of goods and commodities, while creating jobs in port communities and supporting industries such as manufacturing, steel production, agribusiness and power generation. Ensuring the continued viability of commercial navigation requires maintaining and investing in harbors, ports, shipping channels, locks and related infrastructure throughout the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River system, including regular dredging. These activities require close regional and binational coordination, given the interdependent nature of the system and the critical role played by key infrastructure like the Soo Locks and the St. Lawrence Seaway. The Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers recently completed a comprehensive strategy for the navigation system that aims to double maritime trade, improve environmental performance and support the region’s industrial core. The strategy recommends actions to maintain and expand the maritime transportation system and establishes a Regional Maritime Entity to coordinate state and provincial actions. With its dual mandate for both economic development and environmental protection, and its longstanding role as an advocate for Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River maritime transportation, the Great Lakes Commission is uniquely qualified to support the objectives of the governors’ and premiers’ new maritime strategy.

Objective: Improve the efficiency, competitiveness, security and sustainability of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River maritime transportation system to support the regional and national economies of the United States and Canada.

5 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE GREAT LAKES COMMISSION

Strategic Actions:

 Collaborate with the Regional Maritime Entity and other stakeholders to support implementation of the governors’ and premiers’ Strategy for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Maritime Transportation System, with a focus on establishing a maritime careers portal, maintaining the maritime asset inventory, managing data and information to track progress in implementing the strategy and aligning data collection and reporting with the Blue Accounting initiative.

 In collaboration with the Regional Maritime Entity and other stakeholders, identify and advocate for priorities to maintain and strengthen the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River maritime transportation system, including allocating funds from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund; constructing a new large lock at the Soo Locks; dredging to maintain authorized depths of channels and harbors and additional depth needed in critical areas; repairing and investing in aging navigation infrastructure; ensuring adequate icebreaking capacity; developing sustainable strategies for managing dredged material; and supporting the development of technologies to improve the system’s environmental performance.

 Convene or participate in regional partnerships, forums and initiatives related to the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River maritime transportation system, including the Regional Maritime Entity, Great Lakes Dredging Team, Great Ships Initiative, and the Great Lakes Small Harbors Coalition.

4. Economic Development and Waterfront Community Revitalization

Challenges and Opportunities:

The unique freshwater resources of the Great Lakes fueled the region’s early development, with waterfront areas historically serving as centers of economic activity. Currently, many Great Lakes coastal communities are working to restore and reclaim degraded or under-utilized waterfronts and leverage them to support economic development, recreation and other purposes. The GLRI is accelerating this process, particularly in the Areas of Concern. Recreational boating and other water-based activities drive a vibrant tourism and outdoor recreation sector centered on the Great Lakes and their tributaries. Regional leaders have recognized the potential of fresh water and the “Blue Economy” to promote economic growth, attract and retain talent, support water-dependent industries, and sustain a high quality of life in the Great Lakes region. The Great Lakes Commission is well suited to develop tools and support strategies to advance waterfront community revitalization through research, policy development, information exchange and technology transfer, and stakeholder collaboration. The Commission is also uniquely positioned to advocate for federal, state and provincial policies, programs and funding to support efforts to restore and revitalize waterfront areas, ensure resiliency to impacts from climate change, and balance environmental and economic benefits from water resources. Finally, the Commission can collaborate with regional leaders to strengthen the economy and promote the Great Lakes region as a global center for research and development of technologies to utilize and manage freshwater resources.

Objective: Support the efforts of the states and provinces – in collaboration with federal agencies, local communities, and nongovernmental stakeholders – to restore and revitalize waterfront areas and advance policies, programs and funding to leverage water resources to support a strong regional economy and high quality of life.

Strategic Actions:

 Support research, disseminate information, and collaborate with regional leaders to quantify the economic value of Great Lakes water resources, the return on investments in environmental restoration and water- related infrastructure, and the ecosystem benefits and services generated by the Great Lakes, and facilitate a cooperative, regional approach to advancing the “Blue Economy.”

 Support the work of the Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers’ regional economic task force, and collaborate with other partners such as the Council of Great Lakes Industries and the Great Lakes Metro Chambers Coalition, to strengthen water-related infrastructure, industries and

6 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE GREAT LAKES COMMISSION

commerce and facilitate a cooperative approach to improve regional economic performance and competitiveness.

 Support implementation of the GLRI and other regional programs to clean up and restore waterfront areas, and advance policies, funding and information exchange to assist the states, provinces and local communities in strategically leveraging water resources to strengthen local economies and provide benefits for residents and visitors.

 Advocate with Congress and federal agencies for programs, policies and funding that support state and local efforts to clean up and revitalize waterfront areas, including the GLRI, Coastal Zone Management Act, National Sea Grant College Program, and brownfields redevelopment programs, and assist in effectively implementing these programs and linking them with state and provincial priorities.

 Collaborate with other water-related commissions in the U.S., Canada, and abroad to share information, exchange strategies, and advance common goals directed at solving problems affecting water resources and leveraging them as vital regional assets.

5. Coastal Conservation and Habitat Restoration

Challenges and Opportunities:

The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River basin includes more than 10,000 miles of coastline, with the majority of the region’s population and economic activities located in coastal areas. These areas support both rich and diverse ecosystems and valuable industrial, recreational and tourism economies. However, in some areas extensive human activity has led to the loss of habitat for fish and wildlife and impacts to key ecosystem functions and values. The Commission is well positioned to assist the states, provinces and local partners in balancing the use and conservation of natural resources by restoring and protecting habitat for fish and wildlife; supporting the remediation of degraded areas; and ensuring resiliency to changing lake levels and impacts from climate change. The Commission is also developing and managing several collaborative partnerships to coordinate regional engagement, improve management, advance research, and facilitate communication and outreach to address coastal conservation challenges.

Objective: Conserve coastal ecosystem functions and values that contribute to the diversity, resilience and economy of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River basin by protecting natural communities that sustain populations of desirable fish and wildlife species; restoring degraded areas; and managing coastal resources to improve ecosystem services while supporting sustainable economic development.

Strategic Actions:

 Lead and support regional programs that restore, protect and manage valuable habitat and water resources through implementation of the NOAA-GLC Regional Partnership in Areas of Concern, and in coordination with U.S. EPA, NOAA, states and provinces, and local organizations.

 Elevate awareness of coastal conservation issues among decision-makers, managers, researchers and the public by convening meetings, coordinating action and developing communication products such as websites, webinars, and publications.

 Explore and develop data and information-sharing opportunities to support ongoing coastal wetland restoration prioritization, contribute to decision-making and measure progress on coastal conservation and habitat restoration across the region.

 Communicate with partners including U.S. EPA, NOAA, USGS, NRCS, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Great Lakes Landscape Conservation Cooperative and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement Annex 7 Subcommittee, to ensure effective coordination and collaboration with state and provincial agencies,

7 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE GREAT LAKES COMMISSION

agriculture producers, conservation groups and local partners in support of sound land management practices and strategically targeted fish and wildlife restoration and conservation actions.

 Advocate for legislation and funding for federal programs, policies and laws, such as the GLRI, the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act and the Farm Bill, and support their effective implementation and alignment with state and provincial priorities.

6. Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention and Control

Challenges and Opportunities:

Aquatic invasive species (AIS) are recognized as one of the most significant threats to the environmental and economic health of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region. Progress is being made to reduce threats of new invasions and the damage from those species already introduced. Yet, the region remains vulnerable to AIS introduction and spread from various pathways and AIS threats are likely to evolve under a changing climate. AIS do not respect political boundaries and states and provinces vary in their approaches and capacity for prevention and management. Preventing new AIS introductions and controlling those already present is a priority for regional leaders. The Commission is well-positioned to coordinate multijurisdictional approaches to AIS prevention and control. Commission staff is equipped with an in-depth knowledge of AIS issues and strong relationships with AIS practitioners from both the public and private sector. The Commission’s AIS expertise is founded in its historic relationship with the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species. The Commission will utilize its expertise and capacity to advance effective, regional solutions for AIS prevention and control.

Objective: Prevent the introduction and spread, and when necessary, advance the management and control of aquatic invasive species, that are or have the potential to negatively impact water resources or the economy of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River basin.

Strategic Actions:

 Develop and promote communication products and services, including websites, webinars, and publications (e.g., Great Lakes Aquatic Invasions) that provide AIS information and advance progress on AIS prevention and control.

 Develop and promote the use of adaptive management frameworks and data and information integration platforms in order to support decision making (including evaluating costs and benefits) and measure progress on AIS prevention and control across the region.

 Facilitate regional forums and collaboratives working to advance effective and coordinated approaches to AIS prevention and control, including the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species, the Chicago Area Waterway System Advisory Committee, and the Great Lakes Phragmites and Invasive Mussel collaboratives, among others.

 Collaborate with other partner groups engaged in AIS prevention and control to support and advance common AIS priorities, including the GLWQA Annex 6 Subcommittee, the Conference of Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers AIS Task Force, the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, the International Joint Commission, the federal Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, and other regional ANS panels, among others.

 Advocate for legislation and funding to support effective implementation of federal programs, policies and laws, such as the National Invasive Species Act, Lacey Act, GLRI, and Asian Carp Action Plan.

 Lead regional projects that advance policies and solutions to reduce the risk of AIS introduction and spread through priority pathways including internet sales of organisms in trade, canals and waterways and ballast water.

8 STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE GREAT LAKES COMMISSION

7. Information Management and Blue Accounting

Challenges and Opportunities:

The Great Lakes Basin Compact charged the Commission to “collect, correlate, interpret, and report on data relating to the water resources and the use thereof in the Basin or any portion thereof.” Since its inception, the Commission has been a trusted source of information through many programs including the Great Lakes Information Network. Through this program area, the Commission develop the foundation for supporting all other program areas outlined in the Compact, and continue to assemble, curate, manage and deliver information to support the conservation and balanced use of the Great Lakes. A core component of this program area is the Blue Accounting initiative (http://BlueAccounting.org), a partnership between the Commission and The Nature Conservancy. Blue Accounting will provide Great Lakes leaders with information services that measure the progress being made across the region toward shared desired outcomes for the Great Lakes.

Objective: The Commission’s member states and provinces have access to high-quality, curated information about Great Lakes issues from a neutral and authoritative source.

Strategic Actions:

 Deliver consistent, continuous and unbiased information to the Commission’s member states and provinces on issues and outcomes of mutual interest and concern including the support of other Commission Program Areas described in this Strategic Plan.

 Establish Blue Accounting as a leading information service to track the region’s progress towards shared goals and outcomes using consistent data, metrics and methods, working with The Nature Conservancy and other partners in both countries. Specifically, provide support to the Source Water Initiative and ErieStat, described in the Water Quality Program Area, as a Blue Accounting pilot projects.

 Develop and maintain mutually-beneficial relationships with agencies and entities across the region, in both nations, at federal, state, provincial, tribal/First Nations, local and municipal scales to coordinate information management and provide information to the Commission for use by its members.

 Support and enhance the efforts of Annex 10 of the GLWQA, the IJC’s Science Priority Committee and the Great Lakes Advisory Board’s Science and Information Subcommittee to improve information coordination and flow between entities and agencies in the Great Lakes region.

 Coordinate and provide information to support spill prevention and response programs, working with U.S. EPA across the Great Lakes basin and continuing current work with the Region 5 Regional Response Team to build intergovernmental relationships that improve planning and make response efforts more efficient.

 Provide facilitation and information management services to support development of strategies and policies to assure protection of the region’s water resources in the context of increases in North American oil production and associated oil transportation to and through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region.

Conclusion The Commission is committed to constantly improving its organizational processes and using the best metrics available to evaluate projects and services to its member jurisdictions. More specific plans to implement these actions and metrics to measure progress and allocate financial resources will be developed following completion of the plan. We will provide reports on progress to GLC Commissioners twice a year. We will assess progress and address emerging issues annually.

9 Reference

This section includes:

• Great Lakes Basin Compact • Great Lakes Commission Bylaws • Membership lists

o Commissioners, Associate Commissioners and Alternates o Observers o Staff

GREAT LAKES BASIN COMPACT

(With State & Federal Legislative History)

Reprinted by

Great Lakes Commission 1300 Victors Way, Suite #1350 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108-5203 GREAT LAKES BASIN COMPACT

The party states solemnly agree:

ARTICLE I

The purposes of this compact are, through means of joint or cooperative action:

1. To promote the orderly, integrated, and comprehensive development, use, and conservation of the water resources of the Great Lakes Basin (hereinafter called the Basin).

2. To plan 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.

3. To make it possible for the states of the Basin and their people to derive the maximum benefit from utilization of public works, in the form of navigational aids or otherwise, which may exist or which may be constructed from time to time.

4. To advise 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.

5. To establish and maintain an intergovernmental agency the end that the purposes of this compact may be accomplished more effectively.

ARTICLE II

A. This compact shall enter into force and become effective and binding when it has been enacted by the legislature of any four of the States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin and thereafter shall enter into force and become effective and binding as to any other of said states when enacted by the legislature thereof.

B. The Province of Ontario and the Province of Quebec, or either of them, may become states party to this compact by taking such action as their laws and the laws of the Government of Canada may prescribe for adherence thereto. For the purposes of this compact the word 'state' shall be construed to include a Province of Canada.

ARTICLE III

The Great Lakes Commission created by Article IV of this compact shall exercise its powers and perform its functions in respect to the Basin which, for the purposes of this compact shall consist of so much of the following as may be within the party states:

1. Lakes Erie, Huron, Michigan, Ontario, St. Clair, Superior, and the St. Lawrence River, together with any and all natural or manmade water interconnections between or among them.

2. All rivers, ponds, lakes, streams, and other watercourses which, in their natural state or in their prevailing conditions, are tributary to Lakes Erie, Huron, Michigan, Ontario, St. Clair, and Superior or any of them or which comprise part of any watershed draining into any of said lakes.

ARTICLE IV

A. There is hereby created an agency of the party states to be known as The Great Lakes Commission (hereinafter called the Commission). In that name the Commission may sue and be sued, acquire, hold and convey real and personal property and any interest therein. The Commission shall have a seal with the words, 'The Great Lakes Commission' and such other design as it may prescribe engraved thereon by which it shall authenticate its proceedings. Transactions involving real or personal property shall conform to the laws of the state in which the property is located, and the Commission may by by-laws provide for the execution and acknowledgment of all instruments in its behalf.

B. The Commission shall be composed of not less than three commissioners nor more than five commissioners from each party state designated or appointed accordance with the law of the state which they represent and serving and subject to removal in accordance with such law.

C. Each state delegation shall be entitled to three votes in the Commission. The presence of commissioners from a majority of the party states shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at any meeting of the Commission. Actions of the Commission shall be by a majority of the votes cast except that any recommendations made pursuant to Article VI of this compact shall require an affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the votes cast from each of a majority of the states present and voting.

D. The commissioners of any two or more party states may meet separately to consider problems of particular interest to their states but no action taken at any such meeting shall be deemed an action of the Commission unless and until the Commission shall specifically approve the same.

E. In the absence of any commissioner, his vote may be cast by another representative or commissioner of his state provided that said commissioner or other representative casting said vote shall have a written proxy in proper form as may be required by the Commission.

F. The Commission shall elect annually from among its members a chairman and vice-chairman. The Commission shall appoint an Executive Director who shall also act as secretary-treasurer, and who shall be bonded in such amount as the Commission may require. The Executive Director shall serve at the pleasure of the Commission and at such compensation and under such terms and conditions as may be fixed by it. The Executive Director shall be custodian of the records of the Commission with authority to affix the Commission's official seal and to attest to and certify such records or copies thereof.

G. The Executive Director, subject to the approval of the Commission in such cases as its by-laws may provide, shall appoint and remove or discharge such personnel as may be necessary for the performance of the Commission's function. Subject to the aforesaid approval, the Executive Director may fix their compensation, define their duties, and require bonds of such of them as the Commission may designate.

H. The Executive Director, on behalf of, as trustee for, and with the approval of the Commission, may borrow, accept, or contract for the services of personnel from any state or government or any subdivision or agency thereof, from any inter-governmental agency, or from any institution, person, firm or corporation; and may accept for any of the Commissions purposes and functions under this compact any and all donations, gifts, and grants of money, equipment, supplies, materials, and services from any state or government of any subdivision or agency thereof or inter-governmental agency or from any institution, person, firm or corporation and may receive and utilize the same.

I. The Commission may establish and maintain one or more offices for the transacting of its business and for such purposes the Executive Director, on behalf of, as trustee for, and with the approval of the Commission, may acquire, hold and dispose of real and personal property necessary to the performance of its functions.

J. No tax levied or imposed by any party state or any political subdivision thereof shall be deemed to apply to property, transactions, or income of the Commission.

K. The Commission may adopt, amend and rescind by-laws, rules and regulations for the conduct of its business.

L. The organization meeting of the Commission shall be held within six months from the effective date of the compact.

M. The Commission and its Executive Director shall make available to the party states any information within its possession and shall always provide free access to its records by duly authorized representatives of such party states.

N. The Commission shall keep a written record of its meetings and proceedings and shall annually make a report thereof to be submitted to the duly designated official of each party state.

O. The Commission shall make and transmit annually to the legislature and Governor of each party state a report covering the activities of the Commission for the preceding year and embodying such recommendations as may have been adopted by the Commission. The Commission may issue such additional reports as it may deem desirable.

ARTICLE V

A. The members of the Commission shall serve without compensation, but the expenses of each commission shall be met by the state which he represents in accordance with the law of that state. All other expenses incurred by the Commission in the course of exercising the powers conferred upon it by this compact, unless met in some other manner specifically provided by this compact, shall be paid by the Commission out of its own funds.

B. The Commission shall submit to the executive head or designated officer of each party state a budget of its estimated expenditures for such period as may be required by the laws of that state for presentation to the legislature thereof.

C. Each of the Commission's budgets of estimated expenditures shall contain specific recommendations of the amount or amounts to be appropriated by each of the party states. Detailed commission budgets shall be recommended by a majority of the votes cast, and the costs shall be allocated equitably among the party states in accordance with their respective interests.

D. The Commission shall not pledge the credit of any party state. The Commission may meet any of its obligations in whole or in part with funds available to it under Article IV(H) of this compact, provided that the Commission takes specific action setting aside such funds prior to the incurring of any obligations to be met in whole or in part in this manner. Except where the Commission makes use of funds available to it under Article IV(H) hereof, the Commission shall not incur any obligations prior to the allotment of funds by the party states adequate to meet the same.

E. The Commission shall keep accurate accounts of all receipts and disbursements. The receipts and disbursements of the Commission shall be subject to the audit and accounting procedures established under the by-laws. However, all receipts and disbursements of funds handled by the Commission shall be audited yearly by a qualified public accountant and the report of the audit shall be included in and become a part of the annual report of the Commission.

F. The accounts of the Commission shall be open at any reasonable time for inspection by such agency, representative of the party states as may be duly constituted for that purpose and by others who may be authorized by the Commission.

ARTICLE VI

The Commission shall have power to:

A. Collect, correlate, interpret, and report on data relating to the water resources and the use thereof in the Basin or any portion thereof.

B. Recommend methods for the orderly, efficient, and balanced development, use and conservation of the water resources of the Basin or any portion thereof to the party state and to any other governments or agencies having interests in or jurisdiction over the Basin or any portion thereof.

C. Consider the need for and desirability of public works and improvements relating to the water resources in the Basin or any portion thereof.

D. Consider means of improving navigation and port facilities in the Basin or any other portion thereof.

E. Consider means of improving and maintaining the fisheries of the Basin or any portion thereof.

F. Recommend policies relating to water resources including the institution and alteration of flood plain and other zoning laws, ordinances and regulations.

G. Recommend uniform or other laws, ordinances, or regulations relating to the development, use and conservation of the Basin's water resources to the party states or any of them and to other governments, political subdivisions, agencies of inter-governmental bodies having interests or in jurisdiction sufficient to affect conditions in the Basin or any portion thereof.

H. Consider and recommend amendments or agreements supplementary to this compact to the party states or any of them, and assist in the formulation and drafting of such amendments or supplementary agreements.

I. Prepare and publish reports, bulletins, and publications appropriate to this work and fix reasonable sales prices therefore.

J. With respect to the water resources of the Basin or any portion thereof, recommend agreements between the governments of the United States and Canada.

K. Recommend mutual arrangements expressed by concurrent or reciprocal legislation on the part of Congress and the Parliament of Canada including but not limited to such agreements and mutual arrangements as are provided for by Article XIII of the Treaty of 1909 Relating to Boundary Waters and Questions Arising Between the United States and Canada. (Treaty Series, No 548).

L. Cooperate with the governments of the United States and of Canada, the party states and any public or private agencies or bodies having interests in or jurisdiction sufficient to affect the Basin or any portion thereof.

M. At the request of the United States, or in the event that a Province shall be a party state, at the request of the Government of Canada, assist in the negotiation and formulation of any treaty or other mutual agreement between the United States and Canada with reference to the Basin or any portion thereof.

N. Make any recommendation and do all things necessary and proper to carry out the powers conferred upon the Commission by this compact, provided that no action of the Commission shall have the force of law in, or be binding upon, any party state.

ARTICLE VII

Each party state agrees to consider the action the Commission recommends in respect to:

A. Stabilization of lake levels.

B. Measures for combating pollution, beach erosion, floods and shore inundation.

C. Uniformity in navigation regulations within the constitutional powers of the states.

D. Proposed navigation aids and improvements.

E. Uniformity or effective coordinating action in fishing laws and regulations and cooperative action to eradicate destructive and parasitical forces endangering the fisheries, wildlife and other water resources.

F. Suitable hydroelectric power developments.

G. Cooperative programs for control of soil and bank erosion for the general improvement of the Basin.

H. Diversion of waters from and into the Basin.

I. Other measures the Commission may recommend to the states pursuant to Article VI of this compact.

ARTICLE VIII

This compact shall continue in force and remain upon each party state until renounced by the act of the legislature of such state, in such form and manner as it may choose and as may be valid and effective to repeal a statute of said state, provided that such renunciation shall not become effective until six months after notice of such action shall have been officially communicated in writing to the executive head of the other party states.

ARTICLE IX

It is intended that the provisions of this compact shall be reasonably and liberally construed to effectuate the purposes thereof. The provisions of this compact shall be severable and if any phrase, clause, sentence or provision of this compact is declared to be contrary to the constitution of any party state or of the United States, or in the case of a Province, to the British North America Act of 1867 as amended, or the applicability thereof to any state, agency, person or circumstances is held invalid, the constitutionality of the remainder of this compact and the applicability thereof to any state, agency, person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby, provided further that if this compact shall be held contrary to the constitution of the United States, or in the case of a Province, to the British North America Act of 1867 as amended, or of any party state, the compact shall remain in full force and effect as to the remaining states and in full force and effect as to the state affected as to all severable matters.

STATE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

Illinois: (69th GA House Bill, No. 983, 1955) Indiana: (Chapter 220 (H. 216, Approved March 10, 1955) Michigan: (Act No. 28, Public Acts of 1955, Approved by Governor April 14, 1955) Minnesota: (Laws of Minnesota 1955, Chapter 691; S.F. No. 1982) New York: (Chapter 643, Laws of 1960) Ohio: (Amended House Bill 415, Effective October 9, 1963, 105 General Assembly) Pennsylvania: (Act of Pennsylvania General Assembly, No. 421, 1955-56 Session) Wisconsin: (No. 294 A, Chapter 275, Laws of 1955)

The Commission was officially organized and established December 12, 1955 subsequent to ratification of the compact by five states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin). The Commission office was established on the Campus of the University of Michigan in early 1956.

CONGRESSIONAL CONSENT - LEGISLATION

All interstate compacts require Congressional consent (Article I, Sec. 10, Clause 3, Constitution of the United States) in order to achieve full force and effect. Numerous bills were considered beginning in 1956. In 1968, Congress enacted S. 660 (PL 90-419) giving limited consent to the compact as follows:

"Public Law 90-419 90th Congress, S 660 July 24, 1968

"AN ACT

"Granting the consent of Congress to a Great Lakes Basin Compact, and for other purposes.

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the consent of Congress is hereby given, to the extent and subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth, to the Great Lakes Basin Compact which has been entered into by the States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in the form as follows:

"GREAT LAKES BASIN COMPACT"

(The full text of the State adopted Compact text is included in PL 90-419 at this point.)

"SEC. 2. The consent herein granted does not extend to paragraph B of article II or to paragraphs J, K, and M or article VI of the compact, or to other provisions of article VI of the compact which purpose to authorize recommendations to, or cooperation with, any foreign or international governments, political subdivisions, agencies or bodies. In carrying out its functions under this Act the Commission shall be solely a consultative and recommendatory agency which will cooperate with the agencies of the United States. It shall furnish to the Congress and to the President, or to any official designated by the President, copies of its reports submitted to the party states pursuant to paragraph O of article IV of the compact.

"SEC. 3. Nothing contained in this Act or in the compact consented to hereby shall be construed to affect the jurisdiction on, powers, or prerogatives of any department, agency, or officer of the United States Government or of the Great Lakes Basin Committee established under title II of the Water Resources Planning Act, or of any international commission or agency over or in the Great Lakes Basin or any portion thereof, nor shall anything contained herein be construed to establish an international agency or to limit or affect in any way the exercises of the treatymaking power or any other power or right of the United States.

"SEC 4. The right to alter, amend, or repeal this Act is expressly reserved. "Approved July 24, 1968."

FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

PL 90-419 (90th Congress, S 660) HOUSE REPORT No 1640 (Comm. on Foreign Affairs) SENATE REPORT No. 1178 (Comm. on the Judiciary) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 114 (1968): June 12: Considered and passed Senate. July 15: Considered and passed House. July 24: Signed by the President. BYLAWS

Pursuant to the powers and authority vested in the Great Lakes Commission by paragraph K of Article IV of the Great Lakes Basin Compact, the following Bylaws are adopted and shall remain in force until amended.

ARTICLE I COMPONENT STATES

The states of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin having ratified the Great Lakes Basin Compact by act of their legislatures are recognized as the component states of this Compact which has become operative in view of the provisions of Article II, section A of this Compact. The provinces of Ontario and Québec, by actions of their governments through a Declaration of Partnership, are recognized as associate (non-voting) members of the Compact.

ARTICLE II MEMBERSHIP

SECTION 1 - The members appointed by and certified to the Commission by the component states shall constitute the members of the Commission.

SECTION 2 - Pursuant to the provisions of the Compact, each state shall have a total of three votes on any matters coming before the Commission to be cast in accordance with the applicable laws of such state. Should any Commission or any committee, special committee, or task force member be absent from any Commission or committee, special committee or task force meeting, their vote may be cast by a duly appointed proxy in accordance with Article IV, Section E of the Compact, whose authority shall be in writing and filed with the Chair of the Commission or committee, as the case may be, at the time of or before said meeting.

SECTION 3 - Each state or the Commission itself shall be permitted to make use of advisors and consultants of its own choice at any meeting of the Commission or of any committee, special committee or task force. Such advisors and consultants may be permitted to participate in discussions and deliberations without the power to vote.

SECTION 4 - The Commission shall be permitted to designate observers representing the United States and Canadian federal governments, regional organizations, or any others it may so designate to advance the goals and objectives of the Great Lakes Basin Compact. Observers may be permitted to participate in discussions, deliberations and other activities as approved by the Commission, but shall have no vote.

Page -1- ARTICLE III BOARD OF DIRECTORS

SECTION 1 - There is established a Board of Directors (hereafter referred to as “the Board”) to be composed of a Commissioner from each component state. The governors of each state, where not inconsistent with state law, shall designate the person who shall serve on the Board. The Chairs of the Ontario and Québec delegations to the Commission shall serve in an associate (non-voting) capacity on the Board. The Chair and Vice Chair of the Commission shall be elected by the Commission from among the state delegation members and, upon election shall also be members of the Board. The Chair of the Commission shall also hold the title of Chairman of the Board.

SECTION 2 - The Board shall evaluate the work, activities, programs and policies of the Commission and shall recommend to the Commission the taking of any action by the Commission relative to such areas. It shall also serve in an advisory capacity to the Chair and Vice Chair of the Commission and shall perform such other duties and functions as the Commission shall delegate to it or otherwise authorize it to perform from time to time on behalf of the Commission. It shall meet on the call of the Chair.

SECTION 3 - The Board shall adopt budget(s) following review by the full Commission in accordance with Article VII. Pursuant to Section 8, Article VII, the Board shall authorize, by majority vote of members present, the adoption of changes to the general operating budget of the Commission. The Board may authorize increases or decreases of the budget by majority vote of members present. Alterations within previously approved amounts of spending categories, not changing the general operating budget amount, may be adopted by majority approval of the Board members present.

SECTION 4 - The Board shall, from time to time, review the personnel policies of the Commission and receive recommendations from Commissioners and the President/Chief Executive Officer on these personnel policies. The Board may authorize changes to the Commission’s "Personnel Policies and Procedures" and authorize changes in compensation for the President/CEO and staff personnel within available budget amounts. Compensation includes salary and fringe benefits available to staff.

SECTION 5 - The Board shall review proposed policies that are prepared for consideration by the Commission and shall report to the full Commission on the findings of the review and provide recommendations on adoption or suggested changes.

SECTION 6 - The Board shall report on all Board meetings at the next regularly scheduled or special Commission meeting. Draft minutes of Board meetings will be furnished to all Commissioners as soon as possible.

SECTION 7 - Board meetings will be held as needed, including by conference call or in conjunction with full Commission meetings to conserve travel costs to the extent practical for member states. Board meetings shall be open to all Commissioners as observers. All meetings will be announced to the entire membership. Board decisions will be made on the basis of a majority vote of those present.

SECTION 8 - The Board will act on Commission policy and budget matters in accordance with the following guidelines:

Page -2- a) The Commission at a special or regularly scheduled meeting, refers the issues to the Board for action. All Commissioners may participate in discussions, but only Board members will be entitled to vote on the issue. b) The Commission is unable to adequately resolve an issue (e.g., additional research, discussion or coordination is required, in a timely manner not available to the full Commission.) The Board may receive a referral from the Commission, or the Chair, and after discussion with the Vice Chair and President/CEO, may notify all Commissioners that an issue has been referred to the Board for action and resolution. Any objections shall be considered by the Chair. Other Commissioners desiring to participate may do so through the Board member representing their state or province. c) For issues in which circumstances require an immediate decision or action, the Chair, after discussion with the Vice Chair and President/CEO, may refer the issue to the Board when a full Commission meeting is not an option for resolution. The Chair will report on all action taken by the Board to the full Commission by regular mail or equivalent as soon as practicable.

SECTION 9 - There is established the position of Immediate Past Chair to be held by the departing Chair for the period of his/her successor’s tenure as Chair. The Immediate Past Chair may be designated, by the Chair in consultation with the Board, to undertake special activities as deemed appropriate.

SECTION 10 - The Chair may designate members of the Board to undertake other special responsibilities as deemed appropriate.

ARTICLE IV OFFICERS

SECTION 1 - Nominations for Chair and Vice Chair of the Commission shall be made by a nominating committee appointed by the current Chair, and election shall be held at the annual meeting of the Commission. Election to each office shall be by majority vote and each state shall be entitled to three votes. The Chair and Vice-chair shall hold office for one year or until their successors are elected and qualified. In the event the office of Chair becomes vacant, nomination and election to fill the vacancy shall be effected at any meeting of the Commission after due notice to all Commissioners.

SECTION 2 - Chair: The Chair shall take office immediately following adjournment of the meeting at which elected. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Commission and of the Board from such time until a successor shall take office. The Chair shall appoint, or establish the process of appointing, the members of committees, special committees, and task forces. The Chair shall serve as a voting member of the Board.

SECTION 3 - Vice Chair: The Vice Chair shall act for the Chair in the event of the latter’s absence or disability. The Vice Chair shall serve as a voting member of the Board.

SECTION 4 - President/CEO: Subject to the general supervision of the Commission, the President/CEO shall be the full time executive officer of the Commission. The President/CEO shall be employed by the Commission and shall hold office at the pleasure of the Commission; and shall: (a) Carry out its policies; (b) Serve as editor of any Commission publication; (c) Coordinate the activities of all committees, special committees and task forces; (d) Arrange details and facilities, including secretarial and other services for all Commission and Committee meetings; (e) Serve as ex-officio member without vote for all committees, special committees and task forces;

Page -3- (f) Cause to be made a record of the proceedings of the Commission and Board and preserve the same in the headquarters office; (g) Give notice of all meetings; (h) Make recommendations on programs, policies, and activities of the Commission; (i) Exercise general supervision under the direction of the Commission of all the Commission programs and activities; (j) Have immediate charge of the headquarters office and personnel.

SECTION 5 - Executive Staff: The executive staff of the Commission shall consist of President/CEO and such other staff members as may be designated by a majority vote of the Board from time to time.

ARTICLE V COMMITTEES

SECTION 1 - The Commission may, from time to time and as deemed necessary, delineate committees, special committees, and task forces to carry out its initiatives. Each committee, special committee, or task force shall consist of persons from each interested state and province, nominated by the Chair of the delegation and appointed by the Chair. Each state shall be entitled to one vote on each committee, special committee and task force. In addition, the Chair of each committee, special committee or task force may arrange for associates or advisors, without payment of compensation or expenses to the same unless authorized by the Commission, to assist the committee, special committee or task force and participate in its deliberations and discussions without power to vote on recommendations.

SECTION 2 - The committees, special committees, and task forces shall conduct studies and research, prepare memoranda and reports in their assigned fields and on that basis make recommendations to the full Commission for specific action to be taken in a particular field. Any and all action on legislative recommendations of a committee, special committee or task force other than discussion, study and voting will be made only with the approval of the Commission.

SECTION 3 - Each committee, special committee or task force shall meet as needed to conduct assigned duties. Through its Chair, or the Chair’s designee, each committee, special committee or task force shall periodically submit a written report to the Commission at regular annual meetings of the Commission or at other times as deemed appropriate. Recommendations by the committees, special committees and task forces calling for action by the Commission shall be received in writing by the Chair of the Commission and the President/CEO at least one month prior to the date of the meeting of the Commission at which such action is to be sought, unless special permission is granted by the Commission Chair for a late report.

ARTICLE VI MEETINGS

SECTION 1 - Annual and semiannual meetings: The Commission shall meet at least twice annually. The annual meeting normally shall be held during the month of October; the semi-annual meeting normally shall be held during the second half of the fiscal year (January – June). The Chair shall consider recommendations and invitations of Commissioners in selecting meeting locations, and views on conditions which tend to over- ride the normally established meeting dates.

SECTION 2 - Notice: The President/CEO shall mail notice in writing of the time and place of each regular meeting of the Commission to each member not later than 60 days prior to the date of the meeting.

Page -4- SECTION 3 - Special meetings: Special meetings of the full Commission may be called by the Chair to be held at times and places identified in an official call for such meetings.

SECTION 4 - Order of business and rules: The order of business which may be developed by Bylaws, tradition or ruling of the presiding officer of the Commission or Board may be changed at any meeting of the body proposing a change in its order of business by vote of a majority of members present, except as otherwise provided by the Compact or the Bylaws. The usual applicable parliamentary rules and precedents will govern all proceedings.

ARTICLE VII BUDGET AND FINANCE

SECTION 1 - All component states shall share equally in the expenses of the Commission. Each individual state shall bear the expenses of its Commissioners at Commission annual, semiannual and Board meetings. and such expenses shall not be paid out of funds in the Commission treasury.

SECTION 2 - In the case of committee, special committee or task force programs the Commission may authorize the payment of expenses of committee, special committee or task force members from Commission funds.

SECTION 3 - Financial remittances to the Commission by each member state shall be requested for each fiscal year. The amount of each remittance shall be determined by the Commission in accordance with Sections 1, 6, 7 and 8, this Article and Article V of the Compact.

SECTION 4 - The President/CEO shall, on a quarterly basis, prepare and submit to the Board a statement presenting the Commission’s financial condition.

SECTION 5 - With the approval of the Board, the President/CEO may make transfers of funds within the approved budget of the Commission.

SECTION 6 - The budget of estimated expenditures referred to in Article V of the Compact shall be adopted by the Board prior to the relevant fiscal year, and presented at the next meeting of the Commission.

SECTION 7 - The budget of the Commission shall consist of two parts:

a) The "general operating budget" shall include, but not be limited to funds remitted by each member state, Commission reserve funds and interest earned. Expenditures will normally include routine operating costs for the Commission.

b) The "restricted fund budget" shall include income from projects, grants and other sources not considered as a routine revenue. Expenditures will normally be made to fund costs of the projects or grants incurred by the Commission. Transfers to pay Commission operating expenses may be made in accordance with grant or project authorization.

Page -5- SECTION 8 a) The President/CEO shall prepare a proposed annual budget for review and evaluation by the Board at least 45 days prior to the new fiscal year. The proposal shall include estimated income and expenditures for each part of the budget. b) The Board will make necessary changes to the proposal, will distribute a draft budget to the full Commission for review, and following consultation with the full Commission will adopt a final budget document. The general operating budget component shall be used to determine the financial remittance required by each member state. Only a majority vote by the full Commission shall authorize a change in a member state’s required financial remittances.

SECTION 9 - Certain changes and alterations are expected to occur within the approved budget. These will be handled as follows:

a) Changes in the general operating budget, not requiring a change in required member state remittances, may be made by majority vote of the Board or by a majority vote of the full Commission. b) Changes in the restricted fund budget, not amending the general operating budget, may be adopted by a majority vote of the full Board or by a majority vote of the full Commission. c) Changes in the budget, requiring alterations in the required member state remittance will only be authorized by majority vote of the full Commission. d) Changes in the budget requiring immediate action, where a Board or full Commission meeting is not possible, may be made by the President/CEO in consultation with the Chair or Vice Chair, as available. A subsequent report to, and ratification by, the Board or Commission, as appropriate, will be sought.

ARTICLE VIII AMENDMENT OF BYLAWS

These Bylaws may be altered and amended at any regular meeting upon the affirmative majority vote of the Commission. However, no amendment may be considered at any such meeting unless the proposed amendment shall have been received by the Chair and President/CEO at least one month prior to the first day of the month of which said regular meeting shall be held. Immediately upon receipt of such proposed amendment the President/CEO shall refer it to the Board and shall send a copy thereof to each member of the Commission within fifteen days after the receipt thereof, together with notice of the date on which the proposed amendment will be acted upon by the Commission.

Bylaws as approved December 3, 1962; amended July 23, 1965; December 14, 1966; June 14, 1968; November 20, 1968; June 9, 1970; October 6, 1971; June 19, 1973; May 28, 1982; October 7, 1983; March 13, 1986; March 5, 1993; October 15, 2002 and October 7, 2008.

Page -6-

1300 Victors Way Suite 1350 Ann Arbor, MI 48108 Ph: 734-971-9135

May 7, 2021 Board of Directors Sharon Jackson, Indiana Todd Ambs, Vice Chair, Wisconsin John Linc Stine, Immediate Past Chair, Minnesota

Loren Wobig, Illinois Mary Mertz, Ohio Sharon Jackson, Indiana Basia Puszkar, Ontario James Clift, Michigan Timothy J. Bruno, Pennsylvania Laura Bishop, Minnesota Martine Hébert, Québec Basil Seggos, New York Noah Roberts, Wisconsin

ILLINOIS INDIANA Alternate Commissioners John Davis Commissioners Commissioners Deputy Director, Land Management Team *Loren Wobig *Sharon Jackson IN Dept. of Natural Resources Director, Office of Water Resources, Deputy General Counsel 402 W. Washington St., Room W256 IL Dept. of Natural Resources Office of the Governor of Indiana Indianapolis, IN 46204 One Natural Resources Way 200 W. Washington Street, Room 206 Ph: (317) 232-4025 Springfield, IL 62702 Indianapolis, IN 46204 [email protected] Ph: (217) 782-9130 Ph: (317) 232-4564 [email protected] [email protected] Chris Smith Deputy Director, Regulatory Team Stephanie Comer Steven A. Fisher IN Dept. of Natural Resources Comer Family Foundation Executive Director 402 West Washington St., Room W256 939 W. North Avenue, Suite 850 American Great Lakes Ports Association Indianapolis, IN 46204 Chicago, IL 60642 700 12th Street, NW, Suite 700 Ph: (317) 232-1557 Ph: (312) 274-0546 x 1203 Washington, DC 20005 [email protected] [email protected] Ph: (202) 625-2102 Fax: (202) 625-2104 John J. Kim [email protected] MICHIGAN Director, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Kay L. Nelson Commissioners 1021 North Grand Avenue East Director of Environmental Affairs *James Clift P.O. Box 19276 Northwest Indiana Forum Deputy Director, MI Dept. of Environment, Springfield, IL 62794-9276 6100 Southport Road Great Lakes, and Energy Ph: (217) 782-9540 Portage, IN 46368 525 W. Allegan St. [email protected] Ph: (219) 763-6303 Lansing, MI 48893 [email protected] Ph: (517) 284-6715 Yu-Feng Forrest Lin [email protected] Director, Illinois Water Resources Jody W. Peacock Center, University of Illinois Vice President Hon. Candice Miller at Urbana-Champaign Ports of Indiana Commissioner 204 Natural Resources Building 150 W. Market St., Suite 100 Macomb County Public Works 615 East Peabody Drive Indianapolis, IN 46204-2845 21777 Dunham Road Champaign IL, 61820 Ph: (317) 233-6225 Clinton Township, MI 48036 217-333-0235 [email protected] Ph: (586) 469-6101 [email protected] [email protected] Bruno Pigott Josina Morita Commissioner Hon. Dana Nessel Commissioner, Metropolitan Water IN Dept. of Environmental Management Attorney General Reclamation District of Greater Chicago Office of Water Quality G. Mennen Williams Building 5340 Main Street 100 N. Senate Ave., IGCN 1255 525 W. Ottawa Street, P.O. Box 30212 Skokie, IL 60077 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Lansing, MI 48909 Ph : (312) 751-5080 Ph: (317) 233-2550 Ph: 517-335-7622 [email protected] [email protected] Fax: 517-335-7644 [email protected]

1

Marc E. Smith Hon. Jennifer Schultz Alternate Commissioners Policy Director State Representative Sean Mahar National Wildlife Federation 215 State Office Building Chief of Staff Great Lakes Regional Center St. Paul, MN 55155 NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation 213 W. Liberty Street, Suite 200 Ph: (651) 296-2228 625 Broadway Ann Arbor, MI 48104 [email protected] Albany, NY 12233 Ph: (734) 769-3351 Ph: (518) 402-8549 [email protected] Hon. Paul Torkelson [email protected] State Representative Hon. Rick Snyder 381 State Office Building Eileen Murphy 201 S. Main Street, 10th Floor St. Paul, MN 55155 Director of Federal Affairs Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Ph: (651) 296-9303 Executive Division Ph: (517) 755-7570 [email protected] NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation [email protected] 625 Broadway Alternate Commissioners Albany, NY 12233-1050 Alternate Commissioners For Laura Bishop Ph: (518) 402-2797 For James Clift Katrina Kessler Fax: (518) 402-9016 Kara Cook Assistant Commissioner [email protected] Office of the Governor Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Environment and Energy Policy 520 Lafayette Road North 111 S. Capitol Avenue Saint Paul, MN 55155 OHIO Lansing, MI 48933 Ph: (651) 757-2303

Ph: (517) 898.3963 [email protected] [email protected] Commissioners *Mary Mertz For Ann Rest For Dana Nessel Director S. Peter Manning Deb DeLuca Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources 525 W. Ottawa Street Executive Director 2045 Morse Rd., D-3 P.O. Box 30755 Duluth Seaway Port Authority Columbus, OH 43229 Lansing, MI 48909 2305 W. Superior Street Ph: (614) 265-1005 Ph: (517) 373-7540 Duluth, MN 55806-1931 [email protected] Fax: (517) 373-1610 Ph: (218) 727-8525 [email protected] Fax: (218-727-6888 Hon. Theresa Gavarone [email protected] Ohio State Senator For Marc Smith Senate Building Jennifer K. McKay 1 Capitol Square, 2nd Floor Policy Director NEW YORK Columbus, Ohio 43215 Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council Ph: (614) 466-8060 426 Bay Street [email protected] Petoskey, MI 49770 Commissioners *Basil Seggos, Commissioner Ph: (231) 347-1181 NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation Haraz N. Ghanbari Fax: (231) 347-5928 625 Broadway Ohio State Representative [email protected] th Albany, NY 12233–1010 77 S. High Street, 13 Floor

Ph: (518) 402–8540 Columbus, OH 43215

Fax: (518) 402–8541 Ph: (614) 466-8104 MINNESOTA [email protected] James M. Tierney Commissioners Deputy Commissioner for Laurie A. Stevenson * Laura Bishop Water Resources Director Commissioner NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 625 Broadway P.O. Box 1049 520 Lafayette Road North Albany, NY 12233-1010 50 West Town Street, Suite 700 Saint Paul, MN 55155 Ph: (518) 402-2794 Columbus, Ohio 43215-1049 Ph: (651) 757-2014 Fax: (518) 402-9016 Ph: (614) 644-2782 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Hon. Ann Rest,State Senator Donald E. Zelazny James H. I. Weakley, President Senate Office Bldg., Room 105 Great Lakes Programs Coordinator Lake Carriers' Association St. Paul, MN 55155-1209 NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation 25651 Detroit Road, Suite 102 Ph: (651) 296-2889 270 Michigan Ave. Westlake, Ohio 44145 [email protected] Buffalo, NY 14203-7134 Ph: (440) 333-9994 Ph: (716) 851-7070 Fax: (440) 333-9993 Hon. Carrie Ruud, State Senator Fax: (716) 851-7226 [email protected] State Office Bldg., Room 25 [email protected] 100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55155-1206 (2 Vacancies) Ph: (651) 296-4913 [email protected]

2

Alternate Commissioners Ian Freeman Trevor Snyder For Mary Mertz Assistant Deputy Minister Team Lead, International Relations Policy Mindy Bankey Policy and Planning Division – Cabinet Office – Ministry of Assistant Director Integrated Policy and Planning Intergovernmental Affairs Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources Ministry of Transportation 1075 Bay Street, Suite 830 2045 Morse Rd., D-3 College Park, 777 Bay St Toronto, ON M5S 2B1 Columbus, OH 43229 Toronto, ON M7A 2J8 Ph: (416) 627-8040 Ph: (614) 265-6876 Ph: (416) 585-7644 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

John D. Baker Kelly McAslan PENNSYLVANIA Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of President - Great Lakes District Council International Longshoremen's Association, Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs

AFL-CIO 1 Stone Rd W, 5th Floor Commissioners *Timothy J. Bruno 103 Erieside Avenue Guelph, ON N1G 4Y2 Chief, Office of the Great Lakes Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Ph: (416) 660-5764 Pennsylvania Department of Ph: (216) 781-7816 [email protected] Environmental Protection Fax: (216) 781-7818 Compacts and Commissions Office [email protected] Chloe Stuart Tom Ridge Environmental Center Assistant Deputy Minister 301 Peninsula Drive, Suite 4 For Laurie A. Stevenson Ministry of the Environment, Erie, PA 16505 Tiffani Kavalec Conservation and Parks Ph: (814) 835-1477 Chief, Division of Surface Water Robinson Pl South Tower 6th Flr Fax: (814) 833-0266 OH Environmental Protection Agency 300 Water St [email protected] 50 West Town Street, Suite 700 Peterborough, ON K9J 3C7

Columbus, OH 43215 Ph: (705) 755-5341 Hon. Patrick J. Harkins Ph: (614) 644-2001 [email protected] State Representative [email protected] 460 E. 26th Street

Alternate Associate Erie, PA 16504 For James Weakley Commissioners Ph: (814) 459-1949 Thomas Rayburn Tija Dirks Fax: (814) 871-4854 Director of Environmental and Director, Transportation Planning [email protected] Regulatory Affairs Policy and Planning Division Lake Carriers Association Ministry of Transportation Brenda Sandberg 25651 Detroit Road, Suite 102 777 Bay St., 30th Floor Executive Director Westlake, OH 44145 Toronto, ON M7A 2J8 Erie-Western Pennsylvania Port Authority Ph: (440) 333-9994 Ph: (416) 585-7238 1 Holland Street Fax: (440) 333-9993 [email protected] Erie, PA 16507 [email protected] Ph: (814) 455-7557

Thom Hagerty Fax: (814) 455-8070

Director, Environmental Management [email protected] ONTARIO Branch – Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Alternate Commissioners Associate Commissioners 1 Stone Rd W, 5th Floor Guelph, ON N1G 4Y2 Aneca Y. Atkinson *Basia Puszkar Acting Deputy Secretary for Senior Manager – 519-826-4975 [email protected] Water Programs International Relations Policy Pennsylvania Department of Ministry of Intergovernmental Affairs Jennifer Keyes Environmental Protection The Cabinet Office Rachel Carson State Office Building Government of Ontario Director, Resources Planning and Development Policy Branch 400 Market Street 1075 Bay Street, Suite 830 Harrisburg, PA 17101 Toronto, ONT M5S 2B1 Policy Division – Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry Ph: (717) 787-6490 Ph: (416) 500-2732 nd [email protected] [email protected] 300 Water St, 2 Floor S Peterborough, ON K9J 3C7 Hon. Kathy Dahlkemper Craig Brown Ph: 705-755-1241 [email protected] Erie County Courthouse Assistant Deputy Minister 140 West Sixth Street, Suite 104 Policy Division Ling Mark Erie, PA 16501 Ministry of Natural Resources & Forestry Ph: (814) 451-6388 Whitney Block, Room 6540 Director, Great Lakes and Inland Waters Branch, Lake and Water Division [email protected] 99 Wellesley Street West Toronto, ONT M7A 1W3 Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks Ph: (416) 314-6131 th [email protected] 40 St. Clair Avenue West – 10 Floor Toronto, ONT M4V 1M2 Ph: (416) 457-2796 [email protected]

3

QUÉBEC For Vincent Gagnon-Lefebvre Todd Ambs Jérôme Faivre Deputy Secretary, Wisconsin Advisor – International and Canadian Department of Natural Resources Associate Commissioners Relations Division 101 S. Webster St. AD 5 *Martine Hébert Ministère de l’Environnement P.O. Box 7921 Head of Office et de la Lutte contre les changements Madison, WI 53702 Government of Québec climatiques Ph: (608) 264-9210 444 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 3650 Édifice Marie-Guyart, 5ème étage, Boîte 33 [email protected] Chicago, IL 60611 675 boulevard René-Lévesque-Est Ph: (312) 471-1126 x 59711 Québec, QC G1R 5V7 Melonee Montano [email protected] CANADA Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) Ph: (418) 521-3828x4135 Outreach Specialist Vincent Gagnon-Lefebvre [email protected] Division of Intergovernmental Affairs Director, International Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife and Canadian Relations Commission (GLIFWC) Ministère de l’Environnement et de la Marissa Gravel-Labelle Midwest Desk Officer – 72682 Maple Street, P.O. Box 9 Lutte contre les changements climatiques Odanah, WI 54861 Édifice Marie-Guyart, 30ème étage United States Division Ministère des Relations Ph: (715) 682-6619 675, boulevard René-Lévesque Est bte 86 [email protected] Québec, QC G1R 5V7 internationales et de la Francophonie CANADA 525, boulevard René Lévesque Est Ph: (418) 521-3828 ex 4604 Québec (Québec) G1R 5R9 Alternate Commissioners vincent.gagnon-lefebvre CANADA Stephen G. Galarneau @environnement.gouv.qc.ca Ph: (418) 649-2400 x57233 Director [email protected] Office of Great Waters Nicole Trépanier Great Lakes & Mississippi River Director, External Relations and (For Ministry of FFP Vacancy) Environmental Management Division Communications Frederic Lecomte WI Dept. of Natural Resources Fednav Limited Scientific Advisor – Expertise in Aquatic 101 S. Webster St. 1000, rue de la Gauchetière Ouest Wildlife Division Madison, WI 53707-7921 Suite 3500 Ministère des Forêts, Ph: (608) 266-1956 Montréal, QC H3B 4W5 de la Faune et des Parcs [email protected] CANADA 880 Ch. Ste-Foy Ph: (514) 878-6607 Québec, QC G1S 4X4 Dean Haen Mobile: (418) 717-4976 CANADA Director [email protected] Ph: (418) 627-8694 #7121 Port of Green Bay [email protected] 2561 S. Broadway St (2 Vacancies) Green Bay, WI 54304 Guillaum Dubreuil Ph: (920) 492-4950 (Vacant) Governmental Affairs Manager [email protected] Ministère des Forêts, Groupe CSL de la Faune et des Parcs 759 Square Victoria, 6ème étage 880, chemin Sainte-Foy, Suite RC-120 Montréal (Qc) H2Y 2K3 Québec, QC G1S 4X4 CANADA GLC Interim Executive Director CANADA Ph: (514) 244-9517 Erika S. Jensen Ph: (418) 627-8658 [email protected] Interim Executive Director Fax: (418) 644-9727 1300 Victors Way, Suite 1350 (For Ministry of Transport Vacancy) Ann Arbor, MI 48108 (Vacant) Denis Simard Ph: (734) 971-9135 Director, Sea and Air Transport Director, Sea and Air Transport [email protected] Ministère des Transports Ministère des Transports 700, boul. René-Lévesque Est, 24e étage 700, boul. René-Lévesque Est, 24e étage * denotes State/Province Delegation Chair Québec (Québec) G1R 5H1 Québec (Québec) G1R 5H1 CANADA Ph: (418) 646-0700 x 22255 Ph: (418) 646-0700 [email protected]

Alternate Associate WISCONSIN Commissioners For Martine Hébert Kerith Iverson Commissioners Public and Governmental Affairs Attachée *Noah Roberts Québec Government Office in Chicago Policy Analyst 444 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 3650 State Capitol Chicago, IL 60611-3977 Office of the Governor Ph: (312) 471-1126, ext. 59712 15 East Main Street [email protected] Madison, WI 53703 Ph: (608) 843-9706 [email protected]

4 1300 Victors Way OBSERVERS Suite 1350 April 30, 2021 Ann Arbor, MI 48108 Ph: 734-971-9135

U.S. DEPT. OF U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE U.S. DEPT. OF ENERGY TRANSPORTATION John Krummel, Director Natural Resources Environmental Science Division St. Lawrence Seaway Conservation Service Argonne National Laboratory Development Corporation 9700 South Cass Avenue, Bldg. 240 Craig H. Middlebrook, Matt Otto, Argonne, IL 60439-4847 Deputy Administrator GLRI Coordinator Ph: (630) 252-3269 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE USDA-NRCS [email protected] Suite W32-300 8030 Excelsior Dr., Suite 200 Washington, DC 20590 Madison, WI 53717 Ph: (202) 366-0091 Ph: (608) 662-4422 x245 U.S. DEPT OF [email protected] [email protected] HOMELAND SECURITY Maritime Administration Alternates U.S. Coast Guard Robert M. Sullivan Terry Cosby, Acting Chief RADM Donna L. Cottrell Director, Great Lakes Gateway USDA-NRCS, Office of the Chief Ninth District Commander (D9) Maritime Administration 1400 Independence Ave., SW, Room 6149-S 1240 East Ninth St., Room 2081 U.S. Department of Transportation Washington, DC 20250 Cleveland, OH 44199-2060 230 South Dearborn Street – Room 1582 Ph: (202) 690-7246 Ph: (216) 902-6001 Kluczynaski Federal Building [email protected] [email protected] Chicago, IL 60661 Ph: (312) 353-1032 Garry Lee, State Conservationist Alternate [email protected] 3001 Coolidge Road, Ste. 250 Lorne W. Thomas East Lansing, MI. 48823-6350 Government Affairs Officer Ph: (517) 324-5277 Ninth Coast Guard District U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL [email protected] 1240 East Ninth Street PROTECTION AGENCY Cleveland, OH 44199-2060 Ph: (216) 902-6022 Chris Korleski, Director U.S. DEPT OF COMMERCE [email protected] Great Lakes National Program Office 77 W. Jackson Blvd. – G17J NOAA/GLERL Chicago, IL 60604 Deborah Lee, Director U.S. DEPT. OF Ph: (312) 353-8320 Great Lakes Environmental [email protected] Research Laboratory THE INTERIOR

4840 South State Street U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ann Arbor, MI 48108-9719 Craig A. Czarnecki CANADIAN GOVERNMENT Ph: (734) 741-2244 Assistant Regional Director Felicia Minotti, Senior Policy Officer [email protected] Science Applications Midwest Region Global Affairs Canada 2651 Coolidge Rd., Suite 101 U.S. Transboundary Affairs Division NOAA/OCRM East Lansing, MI 48823 125 Sussex Drive Jeffrey L. Payne, Director Ph: (517) 351-8470 Ottawa, Ontario CANADA K1A 0G2 Office for Coastal Management [email protected] Ph: (343) 203-3527 2234 South Hobson Avenue [email protected] Charleston, South Carolina 29405-2413 U.S. Geological Survey Ph: (843) 740-1207 Russell M. Strach, Center Director [email protected] Great Lakes Science Center GREAT LAKES 1451 Green Road FISHERY COMMISSION Sea Grant Ann Arbor, MI 48105 Dr. Thomas Johengen, Director Bob Lambe, Executive Secretary Ph: (734) 214-7200 2200 Commonwealth Blvd., Suite 100 Michigan Sea Grant [email protected] 520 E. Liberty St., Suite 310 Ann Arbor, MI 48105-1563 Ph: (734) 669-3209 Ann Arbor, MI 48104-2210 Alternate Ph: (734) 763-5834 [email protected] Jon Hortness, PE Email: [email protected] USGS Great Lakes Program Coordinator 77 W. Jackson Blvd INTERNATIONAL U.S. DEPT OF DEFENSE Mail Stop G-9J JOINT COMMISSION Chicago, IL 60604 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Ph: 312-886-4043 David Burden, Director Carl Platz, Great Lakes Program Manager Ph: 815-530-3274 (Cell) Great Lakes Regional Office U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [email protected] 100 Ouellette Avenue, 8th Floor P.O. Box 629 Windsor, ONT N9A 6T3 Grand Haven, MI 49417 National Park Service Ph: (519) 257-6715 Ph: (616) 842-5510 x 25521 [email protected] [email protected] (VACANT) (U.S. mailing address) P.O. Box 32869 Detroit, MI 48232 Ph: (313) 226-2170

Page 1 of 2 GREAT LAKES CHIPPEWA/OTTAWA GREAT LAKES AND ST. LAWRENCE RESOURCE AUTHORITY ST. LAWRENCE GOVERNORS AND Mike Ripley. Environmental Coordinator LEGISLATIVE CAUCUS Albert LeBlanc Bldg. Mike McCabe PREMIERS 179 W. Three Mile Rd. Regional Director, CSG Midwest David Naftzger, Executive Director Sault Ste. Marie, MI 49783 701 E. 22nd Street, Suite 110 20 North Wacker Dr., Suite 2700 Ph: (906) 632-0072 Lombard, IL 60148 Chicago, IL 60606 [email protected] Ph: (630) 925-1922 Ph: (312) 407-0177 [email protected] [email protected] HELSINKI COMMISSION

Monika Stankiewicz, COASTAL STATES Executive Secretary ORGANIZATION Katajanokanlaituri 6 B FI-00160 Helsinki, Finland Bradley Watson, Executive Director Ph: +358 207 412 649 50 F Street, NW, Suite 570 Fax: +358 207 412 645 Washington, D.C. 20001 [email protected] Ph: (202) 800-0633 www.helcom.fi [email protected]

Alternate THE NATURE CONSERVANCY Michael Molnar, Deputy Director Helen Taylor 50 F Street, NW, Suite 570 State Director Washington, D.C. 20001 101 E. César E. Chávez Avenue Ph: (202) 800-0661 Lansing, MI 48906 [email protected] Ph: (517) 316-2261 Fax: (517) 316-9886 ALLIANCE FOR [email protected] THE GREAT LAKES NATIONAL WILDLIFE Joel Brammeier, President and CEO 150 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 700 FEDERATION Chicago, Il 60601 Mike Shriberg, Director Ph: (312) 445-9727 213 W. Liberty #200 [email protected] Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Ph: (734) 887-7100 DUCKS UNLIMITED [email protected]

James A. Rader Director of Operations GREAT LAKES Great Lakes/Atlantic Regional Office AND ST. LAWRENCE 7322 Newman Blvd., Building 1 Dexter, MI 48130 CITIES INITIATIVE Ph: (734) 623-2000 Jon Altenberg [email protected] Executive Director 20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 2700 GREAT LAKES Chicago, IL 60606 Ph: (312) 201-4518 ENVIRONMENTAL [email protected] LAW CENTER Nick Schroeck, Attorney SIERRA CLUB nd 4444 2 Avenue GREAT LAKES PROGRAM Detroit, MI 48201 Ph: (313) 820-7797 Christy McGillivray [email protected] Great Lake State Organizer Michigan Chapter 109 E. César Chávez Avenue GREAT LAKES Lansing, MI 48906 OBSERVING SYSTEM Cell: (808) 726-5325 [email protected] Kelli Paige, Executive Director 4840 S. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48108 GREEN MARINE Ph: (734) 332-6101 David Bolduc [email protected] Executive Director 25, rue du Marché-Champlain #402 JOHN G. SHEDD AQUARIUM Québec. QC G1L4H2 Ph: (418) 649-6004 Andrea Densham Fax: (418)476-1906 John G. Shedd Aquarium [email protected] 1200 S. Lake Shore Drive Chicago, IL 60605 Ph: (312) 692-3235 [email protected]

Page 2 of 2

GREAT LAKES COMMISSION 1300 Victors Way, Suite #1350 Ann Arbor, MI 48108-5203 734-971-9135 www.glc.org

STAFF

Erika S. Jensen, Interim Executive Director

Thomas R. Crane, Deputy Director

Program Staff Eric Brown, Senior Advisor for External Relations Patrick Caniff, Program Specialist Margo Davis, Project Manager Eric Ellis, Project Manager Jill Estrada, Program Specialist Siyu Fan, GIS Developer Ken Gibbons, Program Specialist Amanda Grimm, GIS Project Manager Meng Hu, GIS Data Analyst Samantha Tank, Program Specialist Ceci Weibert, Senior Program Specialist Edwin (Ned) Willig, Program Specialist Nicole Zacharda, Program Manager

Operations and Administration Laura Andrews, Design Manager Joe Bertram, Financial Operations Manager Pat Gable, Administrative Assistant Don Leflouria Jr., IT Systems Technician Beth Wanamaker, Communications Manager

Contractors/Project Team Staff David L. Knight, Great Lakes Daily News and Special Projects