Audio Associates

301/577-5882

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

Cooperative Environmental Management

The Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting

Tohono O’odham Nation land

Desert Diamond Casino

1100 Pima Mine Road, Sahuarita, Arizona

October 17-19, 2005

Meeting Summary/Minutes

FINAL
Audio Associates

301/577-5882

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cooperative Environmental Management

The Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting

Tohono O’odham Nation land

Desert Diamond Casino

1100 Pima Mine Road, Sahuarita, Arizona

October 17-19, 2005

Meeting Summary/Minutes

Monday, October 17, 2005 (8:36 a.m.)

Meeting Participants

Board Members

 Paul Ganster, Ph.D., Director, Institute for Regional Studies of the Californias, San 

Diego State University, Chair, San Diego, California

 Amanda Aguirre, CEO/President, Regional Center for Border Health, Inc., San Luis, 

Arizona

 Larry S. Allen, Board of Directors, Malpai Borderlands Group, Rio Rancho, New 

Mexico

 Gedi Cibas, Ph.D., Manager, Border Programs, New Mexico Environment Department, 

Santa Fe, New Mexico

 Gary Gillen, President, Gillen Pest Control, Richmond Texas

 Keiko Herai, Sony Electronics, San Diego, California (for Douglas Smith)

 Stephen M. Niemeyer, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Austin, 

Texas

 Ned L. Norris, Jr., Vice Chair, The Tohono O’odham Nation, Sells, Arizona

 David Randolph, Border Coordination Officer, Arizona-Mexico Commission, Phoenix, 

Arizona

 Diane Rose, Mayor, Imperial Beach, California

 Peter S. Silva, Vice Chair, State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, California

 Robert Varady, Ph.D., Deputy Director, Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy, 

University of Arizona, and Professor of Environmental Policy, Tucson, Arizona

 Ann Marie A. Wolf, President, Sonoran Environmental Research Institute, Tucson, 

Arizona

Federal Board Members and Representatives

 Carl Edlund, EPA, Region 6

 Carlos Marin, Acting Commissioner for U. S. Section, International Boundary and 

Water Commission (IBWC), El Paso, Texas
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 4

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

 Alven Lam, US Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD, 

Washington, DC

 Linda Lawson, Director, Safety, Energy and the Environment, U. S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT)

 John Ritchie, Border Coordinator, Office of Mexico Affairs, U. S. Department of 

State, Washington, DC.

 Jim Stefanov, U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Department of the Interior, Austin, 

Texas

Resource Specialists

 Manuel Ayala, Natural Resource Manager, Natural Resources Conservation Service 

(NCRS), U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Washington, DC

 Jacob Macias, Economic Development Representative for Arizona, Economic 

Development Administration, Seattle Regional Office, U. S. Department of 

Commerce, Seattle, Washington

 Paul Michel, Manager, Southwest/Border Office, EPA, Region 9, San Francisco, 

California

 Sally Spener, Public Affairs Officer, International Boundary and Water Commission, 

El Paso, Texas

EPA/OCEM Staff and Management

 Rafael DeLeon, Director, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management, EPA

 Elaine Koerner, GNEB Designated Federal Officer, EPA, OCEM

 Geraldine Brown, EPA, OCEM 

 Lois Williams, EPA, OCEM

Speakers

 Councilman Edward Encinas, Elders Program, Santa Vera District Council, Tohono 

O’odham Nation

 Mike Connolly, Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians, San Diego County

 Colin Soto, Cocopah Indian Tribe

 Jonathan Ammon, Office of Homeland Security, State of Arizona

 Rose Whitehair, Office of Homeland Security, State of Arizona

 Judith Gans, Udall Center for Policy Studies

 Paula Stigler, Environmental Department, Pala Band of Indians

 Hiram Sarabia, Pala Band of Indians

 René Córdova, Mexican Cosejo Consultivo Liaisons to the GNEB

 Flavio Olivieri, Mexican Cosejo Consultivo Liaisons to the GNEB

 Melody Sees, Environmental Director, Los Coyotes Reservation

 Art Guajardo, Assistant Chief, U. S. Customs and Border Protection

 Roger De Rosa, Refuge Manager, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 5

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

Public Commenters

 Joaquin Murrieta, Sonoran Institute

 Mary Kasulaitis, Rancher, Arivaca, Arizona

 Delma Garcia, Tohono O’odham Nation

 Evelyn Juan Manuel, Tohono O’odham Nation

 Gary Brasha, Santa Cruz Valley Citizens Council

 Rich Bohman, Santa Cruz Valley Citizens Council

Guests {Names were taken from a copy of the sign-in sheet and many were illegible.}

 Hector Aguirre, U.S. EPA, Region 9, Pacific Southwest, San Francisco, California

 Jonathan Ammon, Arizona Office of Homeland Security, Phoenix, Arizona

 Darlene Andrews, Council Member, Tohono O’odham Nation, Sells, Arizona

 Regis Andrew, S. F Ordar (sp.?) District, Arizona

 Robbie Aonan (sp.?), Sells, Arizona

 Cornelius Antonne, Tohono O’odham Nation, Sells, Arizona

 Letticia Baltazar, Pasqua Yaqui Tribe, Tucson, Arizona

 Alexandra Von Barsewhisch, Berlin, Germany

 Nancy Bohman, Santa Cruz Valley Citizens Council

 Dan Brocious, Smithsonian Institute, Arizona

 Anne Browning, Udall Center, University of Arizona

 Marianne Bruonotz (sp?)

 Ty Cáwéz, Coordinator, Arizona Tribal Border 2012, Tempe, Arizona

 Roger DiRosa, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona

 Gerald Fayvant, (sp.?), Tohono O’odham Nation

 Marcom (sp.?) Flores

 Robert Frost, Green Valley, Arizona

 Ethel Garcia, Tohono O’odham Nation

 Nina Hepner, Native American Environmental Protection Coalition, Temecula, 

California

 Jason Hill, Los Coyotes Environmental, Warner Springs, California

 Artemio Hops

 Shanna Ioane, Tohono O’odham Nation

 Laurence D. José, Sells, Arizona

 L. J. Juan, Sells, Arizona

 Rob Kasulaitis, Rancher, Arivaca, Arizona

 Staffer for John Kyl, Senator, Tucson, Arizona

 Bill and Ellen Kurtz, Amado, Arizona

 John Lawson, Council Member, Tohono O’odham Nation

 Shela McFarlin, BLM, Tucson, Arizona

 Homer Marks, Sr., Tohono O’odham Nation, RCMP, Sells, Arizona

 Robert Merideth, Udall Center, University of Arizona

 David B. Miller, CBP/BP, Department of Homeland Security, Tucson, Arizona

 Denise Moreno, University of Arizona
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 4

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

 Ted Noor, [?????]

 Fred Orosco, Tohono O’odham Nation

 Paul Rasmussen, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)

 Ana C. Rivas, Douglas, Arizona

 Celia Rivas, University of Arizona

 Lorinda Sam, Tohono O’odham Nation

 Placido dos Santos, ADEQ, Tucson, Arizona

 Hiram Sarabia, San Diego, California

 Carol and Jim Siorggett (sp.?), Arizona, 35646

 Doralina Skidmore, Congressmen Ginjava’s (sp?) Office, Tucson, Arizona

 Britann Smith, Tucson, Arizona

 Colin Soto, Cocopah Elders, Somerton, Arizona

 Amos Stevens, Tohono O’odham Nation

 Sandra Stone, Oversight Courier, Canoa Ranch Trust, Green Valley, Arizona

 David Tautolo (sp?), Tohono O’odham Nation

 Olivia Villegus, Legislative Courier, NRC, Tohono O’odham Nation

 Daniel Wirth, Office of the Secretary, Department of Interior, Tucson, Arizona

 Metta Young, University of Arizona

Background

The Good Neighbor Environmental Board (GNEB or the Board) is an independent advisory 

committee that is managed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It advises

the U. S. President and Congress on good-neighbor practices along the U.S.-Mexico border. 

The focus is on the environmental and infrastructure needs of the U. S. states that are 

contiguous to Mexico.

Welcome and Introductions

Rafael DeLeon, Director, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management (OCEM), 

EPA, welcomed board members and guests to the first meeting of the Good Neighbor 

Environmental Board (GNEB) on tribal land—the Tohono O’odham Nation. As the new 

director of OCEM, Mr. DeLeon thanked the board members, the EPA staff, local officials, 

speakers, tribal members, former board members, and interested members of the public for 

providing their ideas on how best to balance the critical needs for security and 

environmental protection.

Paul Ganster, Ph.D., Chairperson, Director, Institute for Regional Studies of the 

Californias, San Diego State University, stated the importance of the good turnout of Board 

members and local representatives, because the information provided by them would be 

helpful in directing messages and reports to the U. S. President and Congress. He looked 

forward to the interaction between Board members, Tribal authorities, Tribal members, and 

other interested participants. 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 5

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

Ned L. Norris, Jr., Vice Chairman, welcomed participants to the Tohono O’odham Nation

and described the Nation’s past and present geography. He acknowledged two tribal council 

members Darlene Andrews and John Lawson. Next, he introduced Councilman Edward 

Encinas, who has operated the Elders Program for the Santa Vera District Council, and who 

would offer a Tribal Blessing on the meeting.

Councilman Edward Encinas asked the Creator to provide a blessing on the Tribal leaders, 

Tribal elders, soldiers in foreign lands, meeting participants and the environment. He asked 

for the meeting to provide enlightenment to everyone present. 

After the blessing, Chair Ganster asked board members, EPA staff, other Federal 

representatives, and guests to introduce themselves. After the introductions, he introduced 

the first speaker, Mike Connolly, from the Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians, who founded 

the EPA at Campo in San Diego County, is a cultural historian, and plays an important part 

in border and regional environmental issues.

Speaker Presentations

Mike Connolly, Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians, described the history, territory, and 

tribal groups of the Kumeyaay Nation, specifically the Campo Kumeyaay, and then 

discussed the environmental issues of concern to this Nation. The Campo Kumeyaay

Nation’s territory extends into Mexico. The proximity of the Kumeyaay Nation to Mexico 

provided some protection from the policy of extermination practiced in the 1850s in 

California. There are four Kumeyaay reservations in Baja, California and 12 different tribal 

reservations in San Diego County. Some clan names and territories are shared with the 

Cocopah Indians and the 17 other tribes in San Diego County. 

One issue of concern to the Kumeyaay Nation relates to the transportation of hazardous 

waste, such as propane, by trucks along highways and on a railway that extends into Mexico

and back into the United States. The Nation has an emergency response plan, a cooperative 

agreement with the San Diego County Hazardous Incidence Response Team, and Tribal 

members are certified with the California Specialized Training Institute for emergency

responses.

Other issues are the destruction of vegetation and ground contamination with human waste 

from illegal immigrants. The clampdown on the border has had cultural impacts, because the 

Nation extends into Mexico and people have traditionally been able to pass back and forth 

across the border. Recently, the Kumeyaay Border Task Force was formed to facilitate 

transboundary contacts.

Technical assistance has been provided to the Kumeyaay in Mexico to improve water 

quality and the water system. A Mexican law requiring a fee for new drinking water wells 

makes it difficult for communities to improve their water supply. Agriculture usage is 

exempt from ground water usage restrictions in both Mexico and the United States. The 

laws separating surface water from ground water make no sense in this area, because the 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 6

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

underground water comes to the surface. Underground water comes from hundreds of small 

finger aquifers, so using a formula that treats all the aquifers as one large lake is not 

workable. Each area needs to be evaluated on a basin-by-basin basis.

Urban and suburban development near Indian lands has caused problems for endangered

species. Indian lands are used by non-Indian developers for air pollution offsets and as 

habitats for endangered species. Market trading policy forces tribes to reward nearby

communities for volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions offsets, if they want to 

develop businesses. The Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission has helped by

providing up-front allocations to tribes whenever a market trading program is established. 

The final issue related to taxes that are paid to the state and not returned to the tribes in 

California. The only tax not paid by Indians is for earnings on tribal lands. All other 

earnings are taxed by the State of California, including non-reservation earnings by

members, non-Indian reservation worker earnings, commercial profits, property taxes for 

Non-Indian owned land on reservations, and gasoline and other sales tax. Casino earnings 

are not taxed because they are government-owned.

Questions and Comments

Steven Niemeyer: Does the Tribal Government receive any portion of state sales tax as 

municipalities do?

Mike Connolly: Cities and counties receive a portion of sales tax, but this is not shared with 

the Tribal Government, even though the Tribal Government provides governmental services 

such as fire protection, ambulance service, safe drinking water, and road improvements. 

Steven Niemeyer: What type of relationship does the Tribe have with the U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection? 

Mike Connolly: The relationship is good right now. Campo is one of the main headquarters 

for the border area, so there is a lot of activity including helicopters overhead and sirens. It’s

like a war zone.

Ned Norris, Jr.: What is the Campo Tribe doing with alternative energy projects?

Mike Connolly: The Campo Tribe is building the largest wind energy project on a United 

States Reservation. 

Colin Soto, Tribal Elder Spokesperson, Cocopah Indian Tribe

The Cocopah Indian reservation is located on the Mexican, Arizona, and California borders. 

The main problems are illegal immigrants, Homeland Security measures, lack of surface 

water, and endangered species. The last vestige of animal life is on the reservation in Yuma 

County. Homeland Security efforts to clear the area to find immigrants are destroying the 

habitat and making it impossible to go down to the river, because it is gated. Agents are

flying noisy helicopters over the reservation at night and harassing tribal members in their 

own homes. Mr. Soto made a plea for the Homeland Security officers to recognize the 

Cocopah members, treat them with respect, and to allow border crossings by family

members.
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 7

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

Questions and Comments

Is the solution better communication between the Cocopah Nation and the U. S. 

authorities or is it moving the patrolled areas outside the reservation?

Colin Soto Better training for personnel is one solution, so they know how to treat native 

people. 

Amanda Aguirre: Has Sherry Cordova, Chairman of the Cocopah Tribe met with the 

Border Patrol in Yuma to address this issue?

Colin Soto: They have met on numerous occasions, but often nothing comes of the talks. He 

reminded the Board that he does not speak for the Tribal Government, but for the Tribal 

Elders, who have differences with the Tribal Government.

Ned Norris commented that the Tohono O’odham Nation is impacted in the same way as the 

Cocopah. He suggested that the United States needs to revisit its policy on immigration to 

allow tribes that have members on both sides of the border to have easy access. He noted 

that the Board would be visiting one of the most vulnerable places along the border of the 

Tohono O’odham and Cocopah border with Mexico. He pleaded with the Board for their 

support in addressing these issues.

Chair Ganster: Is the Mexican Governments doing enough to help the Nation with this 

issue?

Ned Norris The United States of American and Mexico need to have a concerted joint effort 

to allow tribes impacted by these problems to actively participate in decision-making on 

immigration policy.

DFO Koerner announced that reading materials and Board reports were available, and that a 

public comment session would start at noon. Chair Ganster briefly described the Board’s 

role as an independent advisory committee to the U. S. President and Congress. The Board 

does not speak for the EPA, which supplies management and support for the Board. What is 

learned from public meetings will be included in Reports and meetings with Congress and 

governmental agencies. Next, he introduced Jonathan Ammon, Southwest Border 

Specialist, and Rose Whitehair, Travel Liaison, Office of Homeland Security, State of 

Arizona, who would discuss Homeland Security efforts, cooperation, and effects on the 

environment.

Jonathan Ammon, Southwest Border Specialist, Arizona Department of Homeland 

Security, discussed his role in Homeland Security, opportunities for cooperation with 

environmental interests, secondary degradation due to immigration, and environmental 

accidents and pollution in the border area. The border area includes six states, 14 cities, 26 

U. S. Federally-recognized Native American Tribes, and 6.3 million people in the U.S. and 

5.5 million in Mexico. The La Paz agreement between Mexico and the United States, a 

mutual agreement for environmental protection and conservation, and a framework for a 

system of notification for emergency situations, is an example of binational cooperation. 

The challenges for Homeland Security from an environmental perspective are resource 

degradation from illegal immigration, potential acid spills from train derailments, and the 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 8

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

need for bi-national and tri-national response agreements. Mr. Ammon then described the 

goals of four cooperative efforts the Border 2012, the Emergency Management Committee 

of the Arizona-Mexico Commission, the Bi-National Training Exercises, and the Borderland 

Management Task Force. 

The goals of the Emergency Management Committee address joint training in hazardous 

waste, fire fighting, bio-terrorism, resource exchange, and the coordination of critical 

incident responses. Bi-National Training Exercises are concentrated on weapons of mass 

destruction, biological contamination, chemical spills, and responses. Mr. Ammon described 

a train derailment and environmental acid spill that occurred on August 17, 2005, that 

contaminated water in both countries, which was dealt with quickly due to the agreements 

between the two countries. The Borderlands Management Task Force (BMTF) is an intergovernmental forum that includes Federal, tribal, state and local governments that addresses 

environmental and immigration issues.

Questions and Comments

Chair Ganster: Where does the money come from for all the joint exercises, training, 

and the BMTF?

Jonathan Ammon: The BTMF is a volunteer organization. The Bi-National Training 

Exercises receives some Federal funding. The International Association of Fire Fighters 

(IAFF) and the Fire Departments in cities and both countries provide resources. 

Manuel Ayala: Are you posed to deal with air pollution?

Mr. Ammon: This is a potential problem that needs to be discussed.

Mr. Niemeyer: In regard to the train derailment, how was the notification 

implemented?

Mr. Ammon: The notification between sister cities was immediate. Contingency plans were 

implemented and Arizona responders went 40 kilometers into Mexico to help out.

Rose Whitehair, Tribal Liaison, Arizona Office of Homeland Security, eloquently

described the issues and concerns of the 22 tribes and 300,000 persons, whose lands cover 

30 percent of Arizona. The major concerns and activities include

 Tribes have been left out of Congressional acts; and the Homeland Security Act does 

not recognize the legal status of tribes. Only two Federal documents, the National 

Response Plan and the National Incident Management System, recognize the tribes.

 The tribal areas have been divided into five regions, each with an advisory council 

consisting of representatives from the fire departments, law enforcement, emergency

management, and county, state, city, and tribal governments. 

 The Homeland Security Coordination Council has tribal representatives.

 In the Tohono O’odham area children can no longer have bicycles, because they are 

stolen by the Mexican immigrants, and armed guards accompanied her on a visit to 

the river, because of danger from snipers.

 Some tribal areas do not have local 911 responders, so calls may be forwarded to 

distant cities. There is no trauma assistance in some tribes.
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 9

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

Some of their initiatives are outreach to all the tribes, grant application workshops, and oneto-one visits to determine needs and problems. Cultural awareness is needed for the border 

patrol so they can learn more about Indian customs and history. The Tri-national idea is 

needed to focus on problems that affect all tribes. The Arizona Counter Terrorism 

Information Center has created a category to include sacred sites and holy lands. Medicine 

men need to be included in exercises and disaster drills, so customs will be followed. 

Questions and Comments

Amanda Aguirre: How many tribes have engaged in tabletop exercises?

Ms. Whitehair: The Navajo and Hopi tribes recently did a tabletop session on a smallpox 

disaster drill and they have planned a drill for November 3, 2005. Several other tribes are 

working together including the Cocopah, the White Mountain Apache, and the Tohono 

O’odham Nation. 

Ms. Aguirre: Are counties and agencies communicating with tribes?

Ms. Whitehair: Cooperation is improving slowly. In Yuma County, a threat mitigation 

includes three tribes. The Navajo and Hopi were able to get 50 different agencies to work 

together on the smallpox disaster drill. 

Ned Norris: Please explain the term Tri-national?

Ms. Whitehair: Binational focuses on two nations Mexico and the United States. Trinational includes the Indian nations, because they are sovereign nations. Mr. Norris added 

that a lot of effort is being made to change the Homeland Security Act to recognize the 

sovereign tribal nations and to provide funds directly to the tribes. Ms. Whitehair said that 

she will be speaking to the National Congress of American Indians to encourage their 250 

tribes to focus on the border issues.

Judith Gans, Udall Center for Policy Studies, University of Arizona, Tucson, described 

immigration in terms of the global context, key issues, politics, and the challenges for 

reform. Globally, there are about 200 million immigrants, with roughly 42 million or 30 

percent in the U. S. and Canada. Immigration accounts for 60 percent of the U. S. population 

growth, including births and immigrants. Arizona has the highest number of undocumented 

immigrants, about nine percent of the state’s population. Since the l970’s, the immigrants 

country of origin has shifted from Europe to Latin American, Asia, and Africa. From the 

mid-60’s, the primary architecture for permanent immigration has been family reunification, 

but the pressure now comes from economic motivations to provide for scarce labor. It is 

estimated that about 30 percent of the U. S. foreign-born are undocumented; the rest are 

refugees or naturalized citizens. The rate of illegal immigration has exceeded legal 

immigration, including those who have expired visas and illegal border crossers.

Immigration laws are out of balance with the global economic realities.

While border control and national security have become intertwined, good intelligence about 

terrorists is more important for national security than border control. The emphasis on 

terrorism in immigration laws has created a hostile atmosphere for persons who cross the 

border for legitimate reasons or for economic motivations. Economic factors have forced the 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 10

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

hiring of un-skilled, undocumented workers in employment that is not out-sourceable. 

Provision of English language acquisition, education, health care, and welfare services to 

unauthorized immigrants has an impact on fiscal policy and has created differences between 

political parties. The cultural impact of immigration is lessened by the fact that the United 

States has a history of integrating people of diverse cultures. 

Questions and Comments

Gary Gillen: Is there research to indicate the amount of money that flows out of the 

U. S. because of illegal immigration?

Ms. Gans: Estimates of remittances to people in other countries are probably not reliable.

Robert Varady commented that security is now paramount in immigration policy even 

though illegal immigrants have rarely been connected with terrorism. Ms. Gans added that 

immigration laws and the Patriot Act have created a pretext for arresting people.

Amanda Aguirre: Has the Udall Center done any studies of the impact of low-skilled 

workers on the economy and specifically individual industries, such as agriculture, 

hotels, and construction? What is the economic impact of human trafficking?

Ms. Gans: The construction industry in Arizona would probably collapse without the lowskilled, undocumented workers. Consumers benefit from lower construction costs. Ms. 

Gans will look into the industry-by-industry impacts and the financial impacts of human 

trafficking and report back to the Board. Mayor Rose reminded the Board that the criminal 

element in human and drug trafficking is a huge issue in border security. Chair Ganster

stated that the laws need to recognize the importance of the global economy in influencing 

the amount of illegal immigration, so the dangerous situation at the border can be 

ameliorated. 

Public Comments

Joaquin Murrieta, Sonoran Institute, spoke from the Mexican standpoint in noting that 

some Mexican towns near the border are dependent on employment from helping those who 

cross the border. He would like to see more Mexican and Native American representation 

on the Board, so their perspectives could influence Board decisions. The Sonoran Desert is a 

shared resource between three nations and everyone needs to understand how people live in 

the area. Chair Ganster noted that Mexican guest speakers and member of the Consejo

Consultivos are valued contributors to the Board’s decisions. 

Mary Kasulaitis, Rancher, Arivaca, Arizona, emphasized with pictures and words the 

huge amount of trash that is left by illegal immigrants on the hundreds of trails in Arizona, 

Texas, and California. The National Forest Service, the Wildlife Refuge Service, and Indian 

tribes do not have a budget to hire people to pick up the trash. Both the Federal Government 

and the state governments need to budget funds for trash pickup.

Delma Garcia, Tohono O’odham Nation, reported on the large number of trucks filled with 

illegal immigrants that pass through her community. The native police force and the U. S. 

Border Patrol are not controlling human and drug trafficking, which has created a dangerous 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 11

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

situation for her family and community. The Border Patrol chases people thorough her 

property and their fence has been destroyed. Local citizens have been killed because they

were involved in the drug trade, but the family doesn’t know who killed them. Some 

families house illegal immigrants, who may be responsible for passing diseases to children 

in the community.

Evelyn Juan Manual, Tohono O’odham Nation, reiterated the concerns about infectious 

diseases from human waste and trash, which contaminate villages and surrounding 

communities. Another concern is the attitudes of the border patrol towards people of color. 

Her nation works with other nations, countries and municipalities, because they provide 

mutual support in times of disaster.

Gary Brasha, Santa Cruz Valley Citizens Council, complained about a Border Patrol 

checkpoint on I-19, 22 miles from the border, which created a huge trash problem in the 

river area and foothills from immigrants who avoid the checkpoint. Property owners have 

had to hire dump trucks to remove trash from area. Some of the trash included hypodermic

needles that requiring gloves to avoid exposure to diseases. Border Patrol policies have 

created environmental hazards in areas far from the borders.

Rich Bohman, Santa Cruz Valley Citizens Council, agreed that a permanent checkpoint 

was easy to avoid and created dangerous and hazardous situations for people in the Santa 

Cruz Valley, because drug smugglers are armed. The main concern is to stop illegal 

immigration at the border. He recognized that the Border Patrol had a difficult job.

Luncheon Speakers

Paula Stigler, Environmental Department, Pala Band of Indians, described a drinking 

water system project with the tribal communities in Baja California. The Environmental 

Department of the Pala Band of Mission Indians made a donation to the Tribal Council in 

Northern Baja to help attend meetings. The CUNA, a non-governmental agency in Baja, 

wrote a grant for Border 2012 Program funds for drinking water projects in Mexico. The 

Pala Band of Indians was asked by EPA to sponsor a grant to fund Mexican tribes working 

on water infrastructure and drinking water projects. The 2005-2006 grant will fund 

construction of some new infrastructure for drinking water is several communities. 

Hiram Sarabia described the work of Ja Jan (Pai Pai for “Good Water”), a binational 

coalition of academics, non-governmental organizations, and community members, that 

address coastal, inland, and drinking water issues at the community level. In addition to 

generating reliable information sources about water quality in the border region, the 

coalition provides impacted communities with the capacity to understand the drinking water 

issues and to do their own monitoring and improve drinking water practices. Communities 

are also connected to a resource network, including several universities. 

Mr. Sarabia showed a videotape highlighting the accomplishments of the U. S. EPA-funded 

project sponsored by the coalition. They worked with eight indigenous communities in Baja 

California to improve the quality of drinking water from surface water sources. The 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 12

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

coalition supported the work of CUNA in analyzing water contamination and training

communities to evaluate the quality of their water supply. The National Commission for 

Indigenous Development, a Mexican agency, also contributed resources for improving the 

infrastructure. One of the main problems is the lack of an electric power supply to draw 

water from wells which are not contaminated. The Mexican Government is investing 

$500,000 in these communities to improve drinking water.

Questions and CommentsPeter Silva Are CUNA and the Mexican Indigenous Development Agency (CDI) 

providing any funding for in-kind services for this project.

Ms. Stigler The CDI has been able to provide almost $600,000 for two projects that will be 

starting in November to dig some new wells in San Antonio [Enequ ????] and San Jose de 

La Zorra. EPA will provide funding for lines from the wells to property lines. 

Peter Silva Will the communities own the systems, and will they be provided with 

training on how to operate the systems?

Ms. Stigler Yes, the tribal communities will own the wells and be responsible for 

monitoring and maintenance. Training will be provided by Ja Jan and Aqualink. 

Stephen Niemeyer Is the surface drinking water purified or boiled?

Ms. Stigler People are resistant to chlorination and lack resources to boil water, so there are 

a lot of gastrointestinal diseases. The new wells will be deep, because many shallow handdug wells are contaminated.

Speaker Presentations 

Update on Activities of the Mexican Council for Sustainable Development by

Rene Cordova and Flavio Olivieri, Mexican Consejo Consultivo Liaisons to the GNEB

René Córdova (speaking in Spanish with a translator) described the Consulting Council as a 

multilateral organization that provides advice to the Secretary of Ecology in the Natural 

Resources Department in Mexico. Using a series of slides, Mr. Córdova described the 

structure as composed of six regional councils and one national council. Representatives 

come from state governments, state congresses, non-governmental organizations, 

businesses, academia, women’s groups, young people’s groups, and towns and villages. 

There are four commissions covering matters related to the environment. 

The Commission on Border Affairs and Pollution Prevention gave several recommendations 

to the Secretary of Ecology in September, 2005. The recommendations were as follows

1. The government should budget resources for the remediation of the Hermosillo 

toxic waste source.

2. The government should continue its contribution to the Border Environmental 

Cooperation Commission (BECC) at the $3 million dollar level.
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 13

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

3. The government should add additional resources to the FY 2006 budget for the 

implementation of the toxic release inventory and should double the number of 

companies that report toxic substances released to the environment.

4. The list of reportable substances should be equivalent to those in the U. S. and 

Canada.

5. Participation in the SEMARNAT in the Border 2012 Program should be 

improved and more resources assigned.

The National Council is interested in the Border 2012 Program, reform of the BECC and the 

North American Development Bank (NADBank), the Tri-National Commission on 

Environmental Cooperation and the Southern Border Environmental Program. The multilaterals favor the Stockholm conventions for the elimination of PCBs and protection of 

global diversity. Another initiative is to encourage collaboration between Cuba, Mexico, and 

the United States on reducing environmental pollution in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Mr. Córdova described the results of a May 2005 meeting of the Border Encounter on the 

Environment, a group of civil organizations and environmentalists on both sides of the 

border, which called for more collaboration on border environmental issues. Issues were the 

social, economic, the environmental impact of NAFTA, and security policies at the border. 

Immigration reform must take into account environmental impacts, the destruction of Indian 

resources, and the imbalance of worker status between the U. S. and Mexico. One 

suggestion was that if the U. S. would invest in economic development in Mexico’s most 

depressed places as much as it does on border security, the need to migrate would be 

reduced.

Questions and Comments

Mayor Rose: In the fast growing border areas, is the Council looking at best 

management practices of grading, infrastructure, etc.?

Mr. Córdova Yes, one of their concerns was urban development and rapid population 

growth that require several years of planning to protect the environment. Another problem 

is the offering of tax exemptions and other concession to compete for maquiladoras plants.

Chair Ganster: Why is the Mexican Government considering a reduction of its budget 

for the BECC?

Mr. Córdova: The Mexican and U. S. Governments are concerned about the independent 

role of the Commission in reporting on legalities and compliance with environmental 

legislation. Monetary participation should be based on the size of a country’s budget or its 

economy.

Ned Norris agreed that the U. S. should revisit its policy and relationship to Mexico to help 

Mexico develop its economy, create jobs and opportunities for Mexican peoples to reduce 

the need for immigration by improving their standard of living.

Melody Sees, Environmental Director, Los Coyotes Band of Indians, San Diego County, 

spoke of the security and environmental problems affecting the Los Coyotes Reservation, 

the Cahuilla people, and other nearby border tribal reservations. The chief issues included
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 14

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

 Improving communication between the Indian tribes, the Federal agencies, CUNA, 

and Mexican tribes through Tribal Caucus meetings, Border Task Forces, the 

National Coordinator meetings, and other meetings

 Racial profiling of dark-skinned people

 Contamination of shared aquifers with Tijuana due to different water standards

 Water transfers and pesticide pollution affecting tribes in the Coachella Valley using 

water from the Colorado River and the Salton Sea

 Increasing air pollution and lack of monitors on the Los Coyotes Reservation

 Increasing rate of asthma in the canyon areas below their reservation

 Lack of Border Patrol and tribal police to control illegal immigrants and their 

dumping of trash and human waste

 Forest fires starting from campfires on trails used by immigrants

 Depletion of surface water, underground water supplies, and springs from 

developmental growth, water transfers, and drought

 Endangerment of big horn sheep due to destruction of habitat by developers

 Air pollution from pesticides that flow into the Salton Sea and attach to dust particles 

 Unlicensed dumps on reservations which are not policed by the local sheriffs

 Unfunded Federal mandates from Homeland Security and FEMA

 Border fencing which destroys cultural sites and are costly and ineffective

Art Guajardo, Assistant Chief, U. S. Customs and Border Protection, introduced two 

members of the CBP, David Gueterza, Agent-in-Charge of the Casa Grande Station, and 

Supervisor Agent David Bemiller, who is responsible for public lands liaison. He described 

the responsibilities of the Border Patrol as protecting the United States from the entry and 

weapons of terrorists. The Border Patrol works with the governments in Mexico, South 

America, and Central America to gain information about potential terrorist threats. The 

Border Patrol has 11,000 agents to patrol the northern coastal areas and the southern borders 

of the U. S. His office is responsible for border crossings in Arizona.

San Diego and El Paso have improved, but the weakest link is between Yuma and New 

Mexico. Borders are out-of-control as illegal entrants move from California borders to 

Arizona and beyond. In 2004, in the Arizona Corridor, they arrested 438,000 aliens. Recent 

improvements in border control consist of more agents, new roads, fencing, improved 

lighting, sensors, cameras, and large expenditures. 

The Arizona Border Control Initiative (ABCI) goals are to improve border security, impair 

smuggling operations, reduce smuggling violence, and reduce smuggling related to criminal 

activity, such as stolen vehicles. The ABCI coordinates with other entries such as CBP Air, 

EIS Investigation, and the Transportation Safety Administration. Patrol units are positioned 

on major and minor roads, so local residents are likely to encounter patrols. Aliens are sent 

to Nogales for processing and removal. Agents now have the authority to expedite removal 

without an immigration judge. 

The longer an agent stays in an area, the more he is able to identify and develop 

relationships with local residents. Stopping persons is dependent on actions, location, time 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 15

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

of day, and direction, because agents cannot tell who is criminal or not by racial or ethnic 

identity. Vehicles are targeted by their large capacity, but occasionally small cars are used.

If a vehicle escapes into the interior, it becomes the responsibility of the U. S. Immigration 

and Customs Enforcement Agency. 

In California, local authorities have told them that the quality of life and the environment 

have improved due to immigration controls in the past 10 years. The main environmental 

problems are trash, road-building damage, and damage from off-road chases. Dave 

Bremiller added that the Corps of Engineers helps build roads and fences; and Gulf South 

Research is employed to do environmental and cultural assessments. Mr. Guajardo

described other problems related to trespass on the Tohono O’odham Nation lands, publiclymanaged lands, and ranches. Since 97 percent of aliens come from Mexico, the consuls of 

Mexico could provide cultural awareness training to Border Patrol agents. 

Questions and Comments

Robert Varady: How many of the 438,000 arrested might have engaged in criminal 

behavior if they were not caught? Is everyone treated as a potential terrorist?

Mr. Guajardo stated that 23,000 of those apprehended did have criminal history in the U. S. 

The act of illegal entry is a violation of the law, punishable by imprisonment. Everyone is 

treated as a potential voluntary returnee, unless they are caught in a criminal act.

Paul Michel: Does the Border Patrol have any authority to use apprehended 

undocumented migrants to help clean up the trash?

Mr. Guajardo: Those that are apprehended are asked to put their trash into bags. To ask or 

force them to pick up trash left by un-apprehended aliens would violate the Slave Labor Act, 

if they are not compensated. Mayor Rose commented that Operation Gateway along the 

California Border vastly improved the environment in the past 10 years.

Roger De Rosa, Refuge Manager, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, discussed 

issues relating to managing public lands, such as those under the jurisdiction of the Forest 

Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, and National Wildlife 

Refuges on the Mexican Border in Arizona. The Cabreza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge 

encompasses 860,000 acres with 56 miles on the Mexican border; and is also a 

Congressionally-designated wilderness area. The problem comes from illegal aliens or 

smugglers of drugs and people, who have been driven to the rugged area by actions of the 

Border Patrol in securing other areas. 

Mr. De Rosa likened the struggle to warfare and disaster management. The Refuge and the 

Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument have been declared the most endangered refuges in 

the nation. Major damage has been done by illegally created roads and trails used by

smugglers and law enforcement alike. Trash and drug seizures are measured in tons—over 

518,000 pounds of marijuana was seized. (Note: Board Member later queried following 

statement:) On the Arizona border, there were 251 deaths from shootouts between the 

Border Patrol and smugglers. Fires started by aliens consumed 3,500 acres in the Refuge 

and 80,000 acres in the Barry Goldwater Gunnery Range. His major goal in the past three 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 16

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

years has been to avoid an environmental train wreck between Homeland Security and 

environmental laws and regulations

Homeland Security cannot escape the National Environmental Policy Act and the 

Wilderness Act, which mandates no permanent roads in wilderness areas. Cooperation is 

needed with the Refuge managers to protect natural resources. However, there are only two 

Refuge officers to cover the area. The placement of barriers along the border has created a 

funnel for illegal persons into the Refuge. Changing immigration laws could stop illegal 

aliens, but would not affect criminal drug activity.

Conflicts are basically related to lack of resources to handle the problem. Most of the 

solutions are unfunded mandates, including funds for additional air assets, search and 

rescue, criminal interdiction, immigration enforcement, vehicle removal, and trash removal. 

Restoration of wilderness areas, protection of endangered species, and destruction of illegal 

roads are impossible until the border is secure. 

Chair Ganster thanked all of the presenters, public commenters, board members and staff 

for their participation, and the Tohono O’odham Nation for hosting the meeting. The 

meeting was adjourned.

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 8:20 a.m.

GNEB Business Meeting

Board Members Present Paul Ganster, Ph.D., Chair, Larry Allen, Gedi Cibas, Ph.D., Gary

Gillen, Stephen Niemeyer, Ned Norris, Jr., David Randolph, Robert Varady, Ph.D., Ann 

Marie Wolf, and Keiko Herai, for Douglas Smith, Sony Electronics

Federal Members Present Alven Lam, Rafael DeLeon, Elaine Koerner, James Stefanov

Resource Specialists Manuel Ayala, Jacob Macias, Sally Spener

Welcome Remarks

Rafael DeLeon, Director, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management (OCEM), 

thanked board members for their contributions and looked forward to working with them in 

the future. DFO Koerner asked members to fill out a questionnaire in their folders that could 

capture some of the benefits of the GNEB, and to fax completed questionnaires to the 

OCEM office at 202-233-0060. A copy of the 8th Report’s tracking for distribution report 

was in member’s folder and outreach activities could be added.

Approval of the Minutes
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 17

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

Chair Ganster asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the May 10, 2005, Washington, 

D.C., Board Meeting. Gary Gillen moved, and Robert Varady seconded, a motion to 

approve the minutes. The minutes were approved unanimously. Chair Ganster asked 

members to send any last minute minor changes to DFO Koerner. 

Membership Update

DFO Koerner provided an update of the board membership. Four members will be ending 

their terms on the Board: Peter Silva, Mayor Rose, Larry Allen, and Gedi Cibas. Gedi Cibas

said that the GNEB had provided positive benefits for the border region, especially in regard 

to problems shared with Mexico, such as the aquifers. He noted that a management scheme 

for the aquifers, which is presently being discussed, could set a global precedent. The new 

board members include James Stefanov, USGS, Department of the Interior; Carlos Marin, 

USIBWC; Captain Randy Grinnell, U.S. Public Health Service, HHS; and Carl Edlund, EPA 

Region 6. 

Performance Measures Workgroup Report-Out

Robert Varady provided some background on the Performance Measures Workgroup. The 

Workgroup had developed a list of items, based on quantifiable performance measures that

members can use to enumerate their activities on a yearly basis. A website is being 

developed by OCEM that will allow capture of more complex activities. Responses to the 

questionnaire would be analyzed, and the questionnaire would be revised as needed. 

Report-Out from the Transportation/Air Workgroup, 9th Report 

David Randolph reported that the Workgroup had drafted a report which dealt with three

areas: (1) ports of entry and the related transportation infrastructure, (2) emissions, and 

(3) mass transit and other public transportation. The draft was circulated to board members 

and their comments were incorporated into the present draft. Mr. Randolph described some 

of the issues in each area and noted that each issue would have a recommendation. 

Comments from the Department of Transportation (DOT) were attached at the end of the 

report. For example, DOT would like to have the section about the NAFTA trucking issue 

deleted. Comments from the Board on substantive issues were requested.

DFO Koerner stated that the draft report is to be completed for Board circulation on 

December 8, 2005. She asked for Board member comments by November 4, 2005. An 

electronic copy of the report would be distributed for ease of commentary. The time for the 

next conference call to amend the draft report, based on written comments, was set for 

November 8th at 200 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. Several members asked to be added to the 

conference call. Robert Varady suggested that even though the focus was on environmental 

issues and transportation, other aspects could be included such as hazardous materials. It 

was decided to reference a previous GNEB Report that covered that subject.
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 18

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

Report-Out from the Cultural Resources Workgroup, 9th Report

Ann Marie Wolf noted that the latest version of the Cultural Resources Workgroup Report 

should be dated October 17, 2005. Ms. Wolf recognized the contribution of former GNEB

member, John Klein. Jim Stefanov had reviewed previous GNEB reports and determined 

that natural resources had been dealt with significantly in the 6th Report, but that cultural 

resources was barely mentioned in previous reports. The draft report has a section on 

natural resources which updates the 6th report. The rest of the report focuses on cultural 

resources. Items from this meeting would be incorporated in the next draft. The committee 

wants input on examples, partnerships, projects, etc. from Board members from all the states 

represented, as the main focus has been on Arizona. The present report will be sent out 

electronically for member’s comments.

DFO Koerner asked members to send comments on Cultural Resources Workgroup report 

to OCEM by November 4, 2005. A conference call was set for November 8, 2005, at 300 

p.m. EST. Sally Spener, USIBWC, asked that the prehistoric sites and Spanish Colonial 

ranch sites near Falcon Dam, as well as, other 20th Century sites that need protection, be 

included in the report. Ms. Rose agreed and requested Ms. Spener to send the relevant text 

to her for inclusion in the cultural issues report. 

Ms. Koerner brought up the idea of asking Federal Agency representatives on the GNEB to 

write a brief synopsis of their border environmental activities through 2005 for the 9th

Report. A sample write-up, prepared by Sally Spener, would be distributed as guidance. 

Mr. Varady added that incorporating brief reports from non-Board Federal agency’s border 

environmental work could also add to the Report’s value. In response to Chair Ganster’s

question about a regular meeting of Federal agencies with border control interests, it was 

decided that the GNEB was the main forum for Federal Agency’s border environmental 

discussions. Larry Allen, Malpai Borderlands Group, noted that in the Department of 

Agriculture, the NRCS, the Coronado National Forest, and the Cleveland National Forest all 

have active programs with Mexico. Mr. Varady thought that the Department of Homeland 

Security’s border activities should be included. 

Selection of Theme for the 10th GNEB Report

To prepare for the discussion on the theme of the 10th GNEB Report, Chair Ganster listed 

several suggested themes and topics on a flip chart. DFO Koerner suggested the following 

basic criterion for Board Reports

1. Relevance to the Board’s mission of advising the President and Congress on border 

environmental issues

2. Utilization of board member expertise.

3. Relevance to current administration’s interests

4. Need for national attention on pressing border issues.

5. Potential for Federal action.
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 19

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

Chair Ganster listed and described the following themes for discussion

 Cooperative conservation

 Transborder environmental cooperation

 Homeland Security and the border environment

 Harnessing technology to protect the border environment

 Integrated pest management at the border

 Border tribes, fences and roads, and the environment

 Border industry and environmental management systems

During the break, members voted on the list of items. The theme receiving the most votes 

was Homeland Security and the Border Environment. {Not stated, but implied.} During the 

discussion, it was suggested to re-name the topic Border Environment and Security. The 

problems of border tribes, fences and roads, and the environment, could be subsumed under

this theme. The impact of roads on Federally-protected lands might be incorporated also.

Another suggestion was to add the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes, because 

criminal acts would involve customs and border people. Although, the focus would be on 

the environment, the theme was timely in relationship to changes taking place in the 

President’s policy on immigration and repatriation. The theme also met the criteria proposed 

by DFO Koerner.

DFO Koerner would pursue obtaining a representative from the Department of Homeland 

Security on the Board so they could have direct input into the topic. In terms of process, it 

was suggested moving quickly to take advantage of the knowledge learned at this meeting. 

A conference call would be set up for Tuesday, October 26, 2005.

Gary Gillen requested that an electronic copy of Roger De Rosa’s presentation on the 

Cabeza Prieta Wildlife Refuge be sent to Ann Marie’s Workgroup. Ms. Koerner would send

them a copy. 

Choice of Meeting Sites and Dates for 2006

Chair Ganster and DFO Koerner proposed a March14-15, 2006 GNEB meeting in 

Washington, D.C. that would coincide with the U. S. Mexico Chamber’s Annual Border 

Briefing in order to get more public attention to the Board’s issues and the launch of the 9th

Report. The Chamber could be asked to allow a small block of time to present the GNEB 

9

th Report. The Board’s Strategic Planning Session could also be done at the March 

Meeting, so that all Board members could be present. Visits to members of the 

Administration and Congress could take place on the day after the meeting on March16, 

2005. It was determined that the meeting dates did not conflict with meeting dates of the 

Fourth World Water Forum or the Environmental Council of States. 

Members indicated their site preferences for the summer and fall meetings as Alpine, Texas, 

Calexico, the Imperial Valley, and San Diego. New Mexico was considered difficult 

because of the loss of board members who could help with planning. Both the Imperial 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 20

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

Valley and San Diego had many border issues. Alpine, Texas has adequate facilities and 

would offer a field trip to Big Bend National Park. The Texas NRCS staff could help with 

planning, as could US IBWC. The issues of site selection were reviewed for proximity to the 

border, border issues, opportunities for field trips, attendance by state, local and Federal 

officials, tribal concerns, and climate. Other considerations favoring the San Diego site were 

the Tijuana River and border issues, the Campo tribe and riparian water restoration, border 

fencing and security issues. 

After considerable discussion it was determined that the three meetings locations and dates 

were as follows

1. Tuesday, March 14, and Wednesday, March 15, 2006—in Washington, D.C. 

Members could visit Congressmen and Administration officials on Thursday, March 

16, 2005.

2. Tuesday, July 18 and Wednesday, July 19, 2006 – in San Diego, California

3. Tuesday, October 24, Wednesday, October 25, and Thursday, October 26, 2006 – in 

Alpine, Texas

Members who volunteered to work on the Washington, D. C. planning committee were Gary

Gillen, Alven Lam, David Randolph, and Paul Ganster. Members who volunteered to plan 

the Alpine, Texas meeting were Gary Gillen, Stephen Niemeyer, James Stefanov, Sally

Spener, and staff from NRCS in Texas. The Texas meeting would require two and one-half 

days to allow adequate time for a field trip to Big Bend National Park. The planning 

committee for the San Diego meeting would consist of Douglas Smith and Hirai Keiko, who 

offered a hotel meeting place near Sony Electronics. {No other names mentioned.}

Board Member Report-Outs

Larry Allen, Malpai Borderlands Group, distributed a report from the Group and announced 

that the Group was involved in the White House Conference on Collaborative Conservation, 

in St. Louis last month.

Jim Stefanov, U. S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior (DOI), reported on a 

cooperative effort by the International Border Area Fire Council to suppress a forest fire in 

Tecate. A Borderland Management Task Force, formed by DOI and Homeland Security, is 

leading intergovernmental forums to address issues of security, safety, and resources along 

the border; and a Binational Corridor Strategic Plan in Otay Mesa addresses economic 

development, transportation, housing, and the environment.

The project to line the All American Canal is being designed by the Southern California 

Water Districts. The design, being submitted to the California Department of Fish and 

Game, will address mitigation, compensation, and endowment of endangered species. 

The USGS is working in the lower Rio Grande Valley on the U. S.-Mexico Border 

Environmental Health Project that integrates data bases related to hydrology and land use for 

both the U. S. and Mexico. The integrated data sets would be extended to satellite imagery, 
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 21

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

digital elevation models, road, political boundaries, and geology; and could be accessed via 

the Internet.

In April, 2005, a U.S.-Mexico Border Symposium on the Management of Natural and 

Cultural Resources was held in Los Cruces to exchange information on transboundary

programs, discuss common issues, and identify opportunities for cooperation. The report 

would be useful to the Board’s Cultural Resources Workgroup. The contact person for the 

report is Ramon [Alevas???] in the National Park Service. Dr. P. Patrick Leahy, the new the 

Acting Director of the USGS, is well informed on border issues. Mr. Stefanov will email his 

report to OCEM for distribution.

Manuel Ayala, Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA, reported that the NRCS has 

established a relationship with SEMARNAT, and will provide technical assistance to a 

United Nations Natural Resources Training Center in Monterrey, Mexico, that will train

natural resource managers on rangeland and watershed rehabilitation. NRCS is also working 

with Pronatura, a nature conservancy group in Mexico, on the problem of decimated 

rangeland. NRCS will assist in the development of a technical guide. It is expected that this 

will develop into an exchange program between U. S. and Mexico experts.

DFO Koerner reported for Paul Michel on EPA Regions 6 and 9 on the following items

 In FY 2005, Region 9 awarded 15 new projects valued at $1 million via the Border 

2012 Competitive Grants Program within the Arizona-Sonora and California-Baja 

California Regional Workgroup areas. The projects are described in the written 

report.

 Upcoming meetings include a Binational Border 2012 in Tijuana on October 29, 

2005; an Arizona-Sonora Regional Workgroup meeting in San Carlos, Sonora on 

December 2, 2005; a California-Baja California Regional Workgroup Meeting in 

San Diego on December 14, 2005; and the Border 2012 National Coordinators 

meeting on April 26-27, 2006.

 In Region 6, Carlos Rincon is the new Director of the EPA El Paso Border Office. 

Three meetings in El Paso in Region 6 include the Clean Air Act Advisory

Committee (CAAAC) meeting on November 15-17, 2005; a truck emissions 

reduction workshop on November 15th, 1005 sponsored by EPA Region 6 and the 

Office of Transportation and Air Quality; and a subgroup of the Border 2012 Air 

Policy Forum will meet on November 15, 2005.

 A New Mexico Colonia Summit meeting will be so-sponsored by NMED and EPA.

Chair Ganster reported on two events sponsored by the Institute for Regional Studies 

1. Development of a master’s degree on public administration and transborder 

governance conjointly with a Mexican University.

2. Recent publications are the current issue of Southwest Hydrology from the 

University of Arizona, with an article on Transborder watershed 

management, and the Tijuana Watershed Atlas.
GPA Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting 22

October 17-19, 2005

Audio Associates

301/577-5882

Robert Varady, Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy, said that the Udall Center 

newsletter could be found on their website udallcenter@arizona.edu. In August, he met with 

the Secretary General of the World Water Forum and learned that the San Pedro basin is 

registered as one of the local action basins for the Forum. In the San Pedro Basin, and 

NOAA-funded project to trying to adapt a publication called Climate Outlook for the 

Arizona-Sonora border area. 

David Randolph, Arizona-Mexico Commission, reported that the Commission’s 

Environmental Committee will meet on December 1, 2005, and will focus on water 

management issues for San Pedro area and Colorado River. They will be distributing copies 

of the GNEB report related to water management.

Alven Lam, reporting for Shannon Sorzano, HUD, said that the Binational Commission will 

meet the following week to discuss housing and cross border issues. They work with the 

Mexican Government to establish better codes for environmental and community planning.

James Stefanov, USGS, noted that the current issue of the Journal of Groundwater, of the 

National Groundwater Association, is dedicated to transboundary aquifers mainly on the 

U.S.-Mexico border.

Stephen Niemeyer, TCEQ, has put in a request to EPA for training emergency responses and 

risk assessment, using the CAMEO software. This followed an August, 2005, train 

derailment and truck collision/spill of propane. In August, TCEQ signed the Texas Nuevo 

Leon Strategic Plan. In August, under the Border Governor’s Conference, a Water Work 

Table was created. PowerPoint presentations on water management are available. They

recommended that the Mexican governors use the BGC Declaration, but they were not 

amenable to using the United States product.

Gedi Cibas, New Mexico Environment Department (NMED), announced that for the first 

time at the Border Governor’s Conference, a Governor from Chihuahua, Mexico, stated the 

necessity of dealing with binationally-shared aquifers. He added that the GNEB 

publications were influential in this unprecedented change of attitude, but the effect was 

probably not measureable. The website is being updated for both format and content. Mr. 

Cibas praised DFO Koerner for her outstanding efforts in supporting the Board; and Chair 

Ganster for his knowledge and leadership of the Board. 

Ned Norris expressed his gratitude for the Board’s meeting on tribal lands, and their 

commitment to tribal environmental and jurisdictional issues. Chair Ganster thanked Mr. 

Cibas and other Board members for their participation.

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:34 a.m.