joel brammeier, alliance for the great lakes

Implementing the new Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement – Jan. 23, 2013

Alliance for the Great Lakes

Joel Brammeier President & CEO jbrammeier@greatlakes.org

The Alliance at a Glance

Mission

To conserve and restore the world's largest freshwater resource using policy, education and local efforts, ensuring a healthy Great Lakes and clean water for generations of people and wildlife.

Supporters

More than 12,000 supporters throughout the region back the Alliance’s efforts in a variety of ways.

Why Now?

The Great Lakes contain nearly 20 percent of the earth’s surface fresh water, providing drinking water to more than 40 million people. Threats to the Great Lakes today are many, however, ranging from pollution and invasive species to wasteful water use and climate change. All demand our attention and commitment.

Today

• The big picture – vision, approach and role of the GLWQA

• Domestic policy old and new

• Specifics on key Annexes

• And where will this lead us?

Vision

• “The Parties, recognizing the inherent natural value of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem, are guided by a shared vision of a healthy and prosperous Great Lakes region in which the Waters of the Great Lakes, through sound management, use and enjoyment, will benefit present and future generations of Canadians and Americans.”

Reality

• The Agreement is not a plan

• The Agreement does not target a specific “desired state”

• The Agreement relies on us to set domestic policy to restore and protect the Great Lakes ecosystem

Approaches

• 2.1.4(c ) – “treating wastewater without relying on flow augmentation”

• 2.1.4(f) – “ecosystem approach” to management • 2.1.4(h) – “polluter pays” • 2.1.4(i) – “incorporating the precautionary approach…where there

are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation”

• 2.1.4(m) – “sustainability…a multi-generational standard of care” • 6 – Notification and Response provisions • Increased diversity on GLEC and IJC Water Quality Board

The Domestic Role

• New Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement provides an opportunity to – Drive funding decisions – Set agency program priorities – Implement and enforce existing

regulations – Update and create new

legislation to achieve success

• In the U.S., we must build on the promise of the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration and the delivery of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative to restore the Great Lakes

Under the GLWQA, we should: • Prioritize the most urgent threats and stresses for spending and program

support

• Establish scientifically credible, publicly meaningful and consensus-based indicators of ecosystem restoration progress

• Be responsive to and collaborative with successful public advocacy efforts supporting on-the ground restoration in both countries, e.g. Healing Our Waters (US)

• Develop and advocate for new regulatory and statutory tools to address persistent and new issues

– Updates to Toxics Substances Control Act – Clean Water Act + federal funding + local innovation to combat

nutrients – Great Lakes Ecosystem Protection Act

Key Annexes

• Chemicals of Mutual Concern (Annex 3)

• Nutrients (Annex 4)

• Invasive Species (Annex 6 and a little of Annex 5)

• Climate Change (Annex 9) & Science (Annex 10)

• …and

AOCs

Clean, restore and delist

Chemicals of Mutual Concern (Annex 3)

• The Agreement calls on parties to:

• Determine those chemicals that are potentially harmful to human health or the environment

• Target these chemicals of mutual concern for action

Chemicals of mutual concern

• Persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic chemicals, a.k.a. Legacy contaminants

• Thousands of chemicals in commerce - unregulated, hundreds have the potential to cause acute or long term effects on human or ecological health

• Prioritization framework and interim controls are needed

Nutrients (Annex 4)

The Agreement calls for:

• Addressing loading of nutrients, particularly phosphorus, in the entire Great Lakes basin

• Ensure implementation of actions to achieve Substance Objectives and targets

• Timetable for establishing (a) objectives for open water and nearshore phosphorus concentrations, (b) priority phosphorus loading targets, and (c) loading allocations

Recommend conducting a gap analysis to identify key problems and areas that warrant the most attention

Nutrients – U.S. Domestic Policy

New domestic policies are needed to address nutrient pollution: • Robust monitoring for nutrients in the nearshore zones

• Implement innovative policies to address nonpoint pollution sources

– Wisconsin’s phosphorus standard & adaptive management – Michigan TMDL process – EPA Water Quality Trading policy

• List nearshore areas on state impaired waters lists for nutrients and

algae as the data indicates • Require Great Lakes states to adopt numeric nutrient standards and

support innovative approaches to achieve them!

Aquatic Invasive species (Annex 6)

The Agreement calls for:

• Implementing ballast water discharge programs in Annex 5 (Discharges from Vessels)

• Implementing programs to prevent the introduction and spread of AIS

• Within two years, develop and implement an early detection and rapid response initiative

Invasive Species – how to “eliminate new introductions”

• Apply the precautionary approach against the vector representing the greatest threat outside of ballast water – the Chicago Area Waterway System

• Create an aggressive ecosystem-scale monitoring and rapid response initiative with state collaboration

• Enforce existing Lacey Act rules

• Update the federal screening process via new legislation

• Collaborate with states, provinces and municipalities in setting a high bar for regulating organisms in trade

Climate Change (Annex 9) & Science (Annex 10)

New Agreement calls for:

• Using adaptive management as a framework

• Establish consensus indicators that assess, anticipate and measure restoration progress

• Integrating climate model data into ecosystem models that drive regional decision-making

The role of science • Critical to have scientifically defensible,

credible methods for monitoring, assessment, prioritization, and planning

• Applied, interdisciplinary research can lead to effective policy decisions, while basic science questions still need to be answered to better understand complex physical processes and interactions

• Examples: International Joint Commission studies on nuisance and harmful algae, a nearshore framework, emerging contaminants; GLEAM project

So, What’s Your Vision?

Acknowledgments Lyman Welch, Water Quality Program Director Olga Lyandres, Research Manager John Jackson, Great Lakes United

Learn more about the Alliance: www.greatlakes.org

LIKE us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/allianceforthegreatlakes

FOLLOW us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/a4gl