COMMISSION FOR 

ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION

COMISIÓN PARA LA 

COOPERACIÓN AMBIENTAL

COMMISSION DE 

COOPÉRATION ENVIRONNEMENTALE

393, rue St-Jacques Ouest

Bureau 200

Montréal (Québec)

Canada H2Y 1N9

Tel.: (514) 350-4300

Fax: (514) 350-4314

In North America, we share vital natural resources,

including air, oceans and rivers, mountains and

forests. Together, these natural resources are the

basis of a rich network of ecosystems that sustain 

our livelihoods and well-being. If they are to 

continue being a source of future life and prosperity,

these resources must be protected. Protecting the

North American environment is a responsibility

shared by Canada, Mexico and the United States.

The Commission for Environmental Cooperation

(CEC) is an international organization whose 

members include Canada, Mexico and the United

States. The CEC was created under the North

American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation

(NAAEC) to address regional environmental concerns,

help prevent potential trade and environmental 

conflicts and to promote the effective enforcement

of environmental law. The Agreement complements

the environmental provisions established in the

North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

To find out more about the CEC’s activities, or to get up-to-date information on

the projects described in this Annual

Report, including related announcements and publications, please visit the

CEC’s Internet homepage or contact us

using the addresses below.

http://www.cec.org

E-mail: info@ccemtl.org
Cover: Evening Grosbeak (Coccothraustes vespertinus). This songbird was originally a western native and

gradually over the past century has extended its range eastward. It is an irregular migrant, 

wandering seasonally between summer habitats in the spruce and pine forests of Canada, western 

and northwestern United States and Mexico, and wintering in Canada, the southeastern United States

and in Mexico.
Mission

The CEC facilitates cooperation and public participation to foster conservation,

protection and enhancement of the North American environment for the benefit

of present and future generations, in the context of increasing economic, trade

and social links among Canada, Mexico and the United States.

JPAC

S

e

cretariat

Council
Table of Contents

1 Cooperative Achievements 13

1998 Program Summary 14

Cooperative Achievements 16

} Environment, Economy and Trade 16

} Biodiversity and Ecosystems 19

} Pollutants and Health 19

} Capacity Building 21

} Law and Enforcement Cooperation 22

Registry of Submissions on Enforcement Matters 1998 25

Linking North American Communities 32

Country Reports 35

Canada 36

Mexico 56

United States 70 2

Message from the Council 4

Report from the Joint Public Advisory Committee 6

Message from the Executive Director 

of the CEC Secretariat 10

CEC Secretariat Directory 103
3 1998 Financial Review 87

1998 Audited Financial Statements 88

Looking Ahead 97

1999 Annual Program and Budget Overview 99 4
Message

from the

Council

Since its creation in 1995, the CEC has taken shape in response to public recognition of the need for

Canada, Mexico and the United States to cooperate in pursuit of shared environmental objectives. The

commitment to forge stronger, continent-wide cooperation represents a new and bold endeavor. An

important step was taken in 1998 when the CEC’s A Shared Agenda for Action was developed.

Under this strategy, four program areas are the vehicles for addressing environmental issues that arise

specifically in the context of free trade, as well as those that are common to the three countries of North

America by virtue of their geographic proximity. Together, the CEC’s program activities help North

Americans understand and work together in addressing environmental issues of concern to everyone on

the continent. 

A flagship product of the CEC’s Pollutants and Health Program Area is the Sound Management of

Chemicals Program (SMOC). In 1998, the SMOC Program made important progress through the development of North American Regional Action Plans (NARAPs) towards the reduction of substances of

concern which are particularly toxic, persistent, bioaccumulate and which are transboundary in nature,

such as DDT, chlordane, mercury and PCBs. Also, important progress was made in the development of

a capacity building initiative in support of SMOC.

An illustration of the unique value of the CEC is in the creation of the North American Biodiversity

Information Network (NABIN), under the Biodiversity and Ecosystems Program Area. This project

began by linking dozens of databases that already exist across North America into one integrated and

comprehensive source of information on birds, their populations, geographic distribution, habitat, and

migratory behavior. The result is a powerful tool, available online free of charge, for amassing information relevant to understanding and addressing threats to any of North America’s bird species. In 1998,

the ongoing development of this remarkable database saw the beginning of its expansion to include mammals and fish and, in the near future, invasive species as well. A creative use of this instrument will turn

it into an input for better ecosystem management.

4
In the program on Environment, Economy and Trade, we have completed the Analytic Framework for

Assessing the Environmental Effects of NAFTA. It was the subject of an extensive review by the public, peers

and by the CEC’s Joint Public Advisory Committee through 1998. In late 2000 we will convene the first

North American symposium on the environmental effects of NAFTA, for which we have issued a call for

papers encouraging the use of the Framework in independent analyses of a range of issues and sectors.

One of the most important functions of the CEC is the Citizens Submissions process, provided for by

NAAEC Articles 14 and 15. It provides a means by which anyone living in North America may bring forward their concerns about the enforcement of environmental legislation, a process which can culminate

in the preparation by the Secretariat of a factual record on the matter. By 1998, the CEC had received

twenty such submissions, requiring the creation within the Secretariat, that year, of a team dedicated

exclusively to addressing these submissions.

Governments across North America, at various levels, are grappling with the relationship between

voluntary standards and government programs to enforce, verify and promote compliance with environmental laws and regulations. In 1998, the CEC’s Law and Enforcement Cooperation Program

Area issued a report on Environmental Management Systems and Compliance. This first trinational

initiative to explore this relationship sets the stage for future cooperative work in this area, and endeavors to help us find new ways to meet our commitment under NAAEC to enforce our environmental

laws effectively.

These are but a few examples of the many efforts by the CEC to support Canada, Mexico, and the United

States as they work together for the protection of the environment and the advancement of sustainable

development. In the pages that follow you will learn about other work, such as the development of a

North American Bird Conservation Initiative, the efforts to increase the information available to the

public on sources of toxic substances through the Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (PRTR), and

the strengthening of North American capacity to enforce CITES (the Convention on International Trade

in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora), among other activities.

We are pleased with the achievements of 1998 but recognize that the CEC’s work is not completed.

What is of particular interest to us is that the work program has increasingly become more than the sum

of its individual projects. We see a CEC able to muster a diversity of resources that converge on answers

to urgent and complex questions about the health of the environment, and that move mutual policies

forward. We see the realization of the potential of this organization to build the capacity of our three

governments to work together in the service of the people who share the North American continent.

United States

Carol M. Browner

Environmental Protection 

Agency Administrator

Mexico

Julia Carabias

Secretary of Environment,

Natural Resources and Fisheries

Canada

David Anderson

Minister of the Environment 

5

Annual Report 1998 } Message from the Council
Report from

the Joint

Public

Advisory

Committee

6

Annual Report of JPAC for 1998

31 December 1998

The Joint Public Advisory Committee (JPAC) had an extremely productive year implementing

and building on the work plan established in December 1997. Five regular sessions were held and

a workshop with the public was organized during the 1998 Regular Session of Council. Based on

this exchange with the public, a total of ten “Advice to Council” documents were prepared on

many issues, including substantial reports to Council on the Three-year Program Plan.

The CEC itself undertook to develop a strategic plan that provided an opportunity for JPAC to

reintroduce its long-standing contention that an institutional vision for the CEC should embrace

long-term planning regularly informed by public opinion.

These efforts converged at the Regular Session of Council in Mérida, Mexico, resulting in the

Council adopting A Shared Agenda for Action, which sets the stage for a three-year planning horizon

clearly based on close cooperation and interaction among the partners that make up the CEC: the

Council, the Secretariat and JPAC.

This has permitted JPAC to reinvigorate its efforts to find new and improved techniques for involving the public in the work of the Commission. Following the strong views voiced during the public

workshop in Mérida and reconfirmation of the public’s interest in participating in a timely and

substantive manner, JPAC set out to establish a work plan that would coordinate with the CEC’s

planning cycle and encourage and facilitate such input.
7

Now, as a regular feature preceding all JPAC meetings, round-table sessions are held with the public to seek input on the CEC’s Three-year Program Plan. We hope that this new approach will

create a productive dialogue between the public, JPAC members and attending CEC staff.

As in past years, JPAC has the opportunity to meet and exchange views with the Council members, and a JPAC representative or I attend all meetings of the Alternate Representatives. Moreover,

the entire JPAC meets on a regular basis with the Alternate Representatives and the Secretariat

staff at critical points in the new planning and program cycle. JPAC has also begun a more formal

and cooperative arrangement with the National and Government Advisory Committees.

Representatives of those bodies are regularly present at JPAC sessions to share information and

collaborate on issues of mutual concern.

It was my pleasure to act as Chair for 1998.

Mary Simon

JPAC Chair in 1998

Annual Report 1998 } Report from the Joint Public Advisory Committee
Canada

T.M. (Mike) Apsey

President & Chief Executive Officer

Council of Forest Industries

555 Burrard Street, Suite 1200

Vancouver, British Colombia V7X 1S7

Tel: (604) 684–0211

Fax: (604) 687–4930

e-mail: apsey@cofiho.cofi.org

Michael Cloghesy

Président

Centre patronal de 

l’environnement du Québec

640, St-Paul Ouest, suite 206

Montréal (Québec) H3C 1L9

Tel: (514) 393–1122

Fax: (514) 393–1146

e-mail: cpeq@generation.net

Jacques Gérin

Conseiller

Hatch & Associés Inc.

5, Place Ville-Marie, bureau 200

Montréal (Québec) H3B 2G2

Tel: (514) 861–0583

Fax: (514) 397–1651

e-mail: jgerin@hatch.ca

Mary Simon

Ambassador for Circumpolar Affairs

Department of Foreign Affairs and

International Trade

Lester B. Pearson Building

125 Sussex Drive

Tower B-4-226

Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2

Tel: (613) 992–6588

Fax: (613) 944–1852

e-mail:

mary.simon@extott07.x400.gc.ca

Donna Tingley 

Executive Director

Environmental Law Centre

10709 Jasper Avenue, Suite 204

Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3N3

Tel: (403) 424–5099

Fax: (403) 424–5133

e-mail: dtingley@elc.ab.ca

Mexico

Guillermo Barroso

Representante

Sector Empresarial Mexicano

Sierra Nevada 755

Col. Lomas de Chapultepec

México, DF 11000

Tel: (011 525) 202 83–09 / 

202 91–55

Fax: (011 525) 520 54–12

(011 525) 520 16–95

e-mail:

103144.3071@compuserve.com

Jorge Bustamante

Expresidente

El Colegio de la 

Frontera Norte, A.C.

Abelardo L. Rodríguez 2925

Tijuana, Baja California 22320

Tel: (011 526) 634 24–01 /

631 35–35 Ext.3430

Fax: (011 526) 634 24–01

e-mail: jorgeb@colef.mx

Jesús Druk

Rector

Universidad Autónoma de 

Baja California Sur 

Carretera Al Sur Km 5.5.

A.P. 19-B

La Paz, Baja California Sur 23080

Tel: (011 521) 121 18–70

Fax: (011 521) 125 14–45 (Tone de fax)

(011 521) 121 07–77

e-mail: jdruk@calafia.uabcs.mx

Iván Restrepo

Director 

Centro de Ecología y Desarrollo, A.C.

Calle Chiapas 208, Departamento 7

Col. Roma Sur

México, DF 06700

Tel: (011 525) 264 87–58

Fax: (011 525) 264 21–38

(011 525) 286 90–84

e-mail: cecodes@laneta.apc.org

Raúl Tornel

Presidente

Comisión de Ecología 

de la Industria Nacional

Concamin 

Camino a Santa Lucía # 198

Fracc. Industrial San Antonio

Azcapotzalco, México, DF 02760

Tel: (011 525) 353 31–94

Fax: (011 525) 561 00–97

e-mail: rtornel@tornel.com.mx

United States

Peter Berle

P.O. Box 881

Stockbridge, Massachusetts 01262

Tel: (413) 298–0061

Fax: (413) 298–0069

e-mail: pberle@audubon.org

Dan Morales

Attorney General

Natural Resources Division

209 West 14th Street, 10th Floor

Austin, Texas 78701

Tel: (512) 463–2107

Fax: (512) 463–2063

Jonathan Plaut

3 Ashland Rd.

Summit, New Jersey 07901

Tel: (908) 273–4127

Fax: (908) 273–6836

e-mail: jplaut@aol.com

Jean Richardson

Director, EPIC Project

Environmental Program

The University of Vermont

153 South Prospect Street

Burlington, Vermont 05405

Tel: (802) 656–4055

Fax: (802) 656–8015

(802) 425–3733

e-mail: 

jean_richardson@together.org

John Wirth

President

North American Institute

708 Paseo de Peralta

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501

Tel: (505) 982–3657

Fax: (505) 983–5840

e-mail: naminet@santafe.edu

JPAC Members } 1998

8
9

Annual Report 1998 } Report from the Joint Public Advisory Committee

JPAC Vision Statement

The Joint Public Advisory Committee (JPAC), together with the Council and the Secretariat comprise the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), a unique institution

charged with seizing an historic opportunity.

The North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation sets a precedent as a formal

environmental agreement adopted in parallel with a trade agreement, and the Commission it

created also set a precedent by including a public, nongovernmental advisory group as one of

its components.

JPAC was established as a cooperative mechanism to advise the Council in its deliberations and

to advise the Secretariat in its planning and activities.

Our vision is to promote continental cooperation in ecosystem protection and sustainable economic development, and to ensure active public participation and transparency in the actions of

the Commission.

While we come from three different nations, and have different institutional connections, we

serve on JPAC as individual citizens of the North American continent, joined in a commitment

to preserving and enhancing our common environment and to achieving a sustainable society.

JPAC will work to provide firm leadership and constructive contributions to build a trinational

model of collaboration, consensus building, and consensus-based results. JPAC is, in effect, a

model for the future in a process which is without precedent, and which presents a great opportunity for cooperative progress.

26 July 1994

Washington, D.C.
Message from the

Executive Director of

the CEC Secretariat

In the short life of the CEC, 1998 is proving to have been a pivotal year. It saw many of the

Commission’s early efforts to promote environmental cooperation and protection in the region

begin to bear fruit. It was also a year of renewal. Fundamental to the renewal process was the set

of recommendations made by the Independent Review Committee established by the three Parties.

In turn, this gave rise to A Shared Agenda for Action, a clear and compelling vision articulated by the

Council that has guided the redesign of the CEC’s program. More refined and strategically focused,

the CEC has emerged with an even greater capacity to facilitate the trinational partnership so crucial to the protection of the North American environment. 

Our work is now organized under the twin goals of pursuing environmental sustainability in open

markets and stewardship of the North American environment, and is centered around four core

program areas: Environment, Economy and Trade; Conservation of Biodiversity; Pollutants and

Health; and Law and Policy. The CEC also moved from the previous annual program structure to

a new three-year work program, enhancing our capacity to plan and execute our activities.

10
In the program area of Environment, Economy and Trade, the CEC is helping to improve the analytical tools available to the public and governments by developing a methodology to evaluate the

environmental impacts of NAFTA and evaluating environmental trends to design preventative and

anticipatory responses. The CEC is also examining the means of enhancing the North American

trade in green goods and services by launching a pilot project evaluating the market for 

shade-grown coffee in addition to considering common criteria for the product and promoting

sustainable tourism in natural areas.

To advance the conservation of biological diversity, the CEC is identifying key strategic directions

for North American cooperation, promoting stewardship for shared terrestrial and marine ecosystems and transboundary species, and improving information on regional biodiversity through the

North American Biodiversity Information Network. The CEC-sponsored North American Bird

Conservation Initiative is an unprecedented effort by over two hundred public and private organizations, agencies and groups to coordinate actions across borders to ensure the long-term survival

of birds and other species in the region.

With respect to pollution and health, the CEC works to prevent and correct adverse effects from

pollution to human and ecosystem health by cooperating on a broad range of air issues, defining

actions for reducing or eliminating such persistent pollutants as mercury, DDT, PCBs, and chlordane, and enabling public access to the information on emissions through its annual North American

Pollutant Release and Transfer Register report.

Finally, the Law and Policy Program strengthens regional cooperation in developing and improving environmental laws and regulations, as well in making private standards more compatible

across the region. CEC activities in this regard include promoting enforcement cooperation by,

for example, supporting the North American Wildlife Enforcement Group, a network of enforcement officials from the three countries working together to enhance regional enforcement of

national and international laws for wildlife protection, among other means, and by assisting the

Parties in implementing transboundary environmental impact assessments. 

Janine Ferretti

CEC Executive Director

11

Annual Report 1998 } Message from the Executive Director of the CEC Secretariat

1

Cooperative

Achievements
1998

Program 

Summary

The goal of the Environment, Economy and Trade program 

is to encourage mutual compatibility of trade environmental

and economic policies and instruments within North America

and between North America and other trade alliances 

or regions.

} NAFTA Environmental Effects

} Exploring the Linkages between

Environment and Trade

} Emerging Trends in North America

} Promoting Trade in Green Goods:

Inventory

} Technology Clearinghouse

} Sustainable Tourism in Natural Areas

} Shared Approaches to Byproduct

Synergy

} Exploring Linkages between 

Trade and Species’ Conservation 

in North America

The goals of projects in this program are to promote 

and conserve ecosystem health and integrity, and foster

and encourage the conservation, protection and sustainable use of biodiversity and its components.

} Cooperation in the Conservation

of Birds of North America

} North American Biodiversity

Information Network

Biodiversity and Ecosystems

Environment, 

Economy and Trade 
The goal of the program on Pollutants and

Health is to facilitate cooperative initiatives 

to reduce pollution risks and minimize 

pollution impacts.

} Sound Management of

Chemicals

} Cooperation on North

American Air Quality

} North American Pollutant

Release and Transfer Register

The goal of the program on

Capacity Building is to maximize

opportunities for public participation

and to develop capacity building

mechanisms such as training, scientific

and technical exchange and education.

} Cooperation on the Protection 

of Marine and Coastal Area

Ecosystems

} Capacity Building in Pollution

Prevention

The goal of the Law and Enforcement

Cooperation program is to facilitate the 

development of law, policy and economic

instruments; to aid the development of 

alternative approaches to achieving compliance, including effective enforcement; and 

to promote greater public participation and

transparency in decision-making.

} North American Regional

Enforcement Forum

} Strengthening Regional

Capacity to Enforce CITES

} Hazardous Waste Enforcement

} Environmental Management

Systems and Compliance

} Compliance Indicators

Pollutants and Health

Law and

Enforcement Cooperation

Capacity Building
Cooperative

Achievements

Environment, Economy and Trade

NAFTA Environmental Effects

This project seeks to develop and test a methodology for assessing the environmental impacts of NAFTA. A framework for analysis was developed to

improve understanding of the connections between trade and the environment,

to assist in anticipating important environmental impacts in the context of trade

liberalization, and to develop policy tools to better mitigate negative impacts

and maximize positive ones. In Phase II of this project, completed in 1998, the

second draft of the Framework was developed. Four peer reviewers from each

country prepared reports on the Framework for the CEC, which were subsequently made public. The CEC-developed model is currently under consideration

by a number of international organizations, and policy and research centers.

Exploring the Linkages between Environment and Trade

In order to address the project goal of improving the understanding of the links between environment and trade, the Secretariat proposed an inventory of ongoing projects or studies underway

in this area and convened a meeting of international institutions working on trade and environment. From this background information, the Council will determine priorities for future work

in the Environment, Economy and Trade program.

16
Annual Report 1998 } Cooperative Achievements

17

Emerging Trends in North America

Government experts from Canada, Mexico and the United States jointly explored and agreed on

the feasibility of using a forecasting tool that would allow the Parties to link developments in the

expansion and growth of the North American economy with emerging environmental trends and

indicators in order to anticipate environmental issues.

An Intergovernmental Group of Experts met for the first time in December 1998. They considered

available modeling tools, or those that could be developed/adapted, to allow linkages to be made

between trade and economic factors and environmental trends; the type of data inputs required; the

feasibility of using this type of analytical tool; and implications for the 1999 work program. The

group agreed that engaging the public and relevant stakeholders is an important part of its work. It

further decided to forge close links with JPAC, as well as relevant centers of excellence.

Promoting Trade in Green Goods: Inventory

Recognizing the complexities of any effort to distinguish products on the basis of their environmental attributes (such as the need for good science, and a transparent and credible process), this

project focuses on the development and distribution of informational materials designed to facilitate the connection between producers and consumers of “green products.” The purpose of the

project is to provide information on key environmental labeling, environmental certification and

procurement policies in three NAAEC countries. The study considers key governmental and nongovernmental systems, and umbrella systems that are both national and, to the extent feasible,

subnational or local. A report detailing labeling, certification and government procurement projects in Canada, Mexico and the United States was prepared for release in 1999. Additional

information will be provided regarding the comparability of different schemes, opportunities for

mutual recognition, and trends in related, market-based instruments.

Technology Clearinghouse

In August 1996, the CEC signed a memorandum of understanding that established the intent of

the partners and the CEC to collaborate in the development of electronic environmental technology information services to assist North American companies.

The new entity, Services and Information on Ecotechnologies (SIE), will build on and support

efforts of the North American governments; gather information on available environmental technologies and make that information available to potential users in a form that will assist them to

make the environmentally and economically preferred choice for their particular situation; encourage the verification and independent testing of technologies; assist suppliers to increase sales in

Canada, the United States and Mexico; build environmental-technology linkages between North

America and Latin America; and assist in the introduction of North American environmental technologies to Central and South America. The CEC has allocated limited seed money to SIE and

has assisted with fund-raising to meet start-up costs.

Periodic meetings were held in 1998 for the SIE partners and the CEC to review progress made

and future steps needed. A marketing and development consultant was retained to help obtain

funding for SIE, and determine appropriate next steps to ensure its economic viability.

17
Nongovernmental Participation in Conservation of Protected Areas and Adjacent Land Holdings

The CEC completed an inventory of ways that nongovernmental participation can help in the

conservation of protected areas and adjacent land holdings in North America, with an emphasis

on innovative approaches. The results of the project were presented in a technical workshop in

Mexico, where participating experts contributed to the identification of existing or promising

conservation mechanisms in Mexico. 

18

Sustainable Tourism in Natural Areas

This project is intended to provide an initial assessment of demand for goods and services related

to eco-tourism. An expert report was prepared on North American approaches to and experience with eco-tourism. It documents ongoing initiatives, considers definitions of sustainable

eco-tourism, discusses best practices, considers lessons learned from past initiatives, identifies

human use management in protected areas, and identifies needs for future research.

Shared Approaches to Byproduct Synergy

The objective of byproduct synergy (BPS) is to promote joint commercial development of an economic sector with a related environmental sector so that the waste product of one industry becomes

the raw material used by a second industry.

More than 20 companies and/or organizations have agreed to participate in the process of systematically seeking out byproduct synergies that are profitable as well as environmentally beneficial.

Education is required to introduce the concept of byproduct synergy to the companies and organizations participating in the project.

A “materials balance” project was launched in Alberta to find means of characterizing raw materials, products and wastes in ways that protect companies’ confidentiality concerns yet offer a

means to analyze the streams in search of synergies. Analysis of the materials balance will involve

strategic and technical approaches aimed at identifying existing synergies and potential partners

that could be recruited to the region. Various technological advancements in the treatment and

handling of products, byproducts and wastes will also be applied.

Implementation will focus on preparing plans for the best synergies identified, based on their economic, environmental and social values. A minimum of three successful synergies per project will

be identified per location, starting with Tampico, Mexico.

Exploring Linkages between Trade and Species’ Conservation in North America

In 1998, the CEC undertook a scoping exercise to identify opportunities for future work in the

area of the trade in and conservation of species in North America. The general purpose of this

work was to explore whether opportunities exist for the sustainable use of resources to enhance

ecosystem management and conservation. The Secretariat, in consultation with

the Parties and other bodies, identified and assembled existing information related

to the current legal and illegal markets for and trade in North American wildlife

and wildlife products. This included the identification of sources of information

on such trade, demand and supply valuations, and market access information.

Further development of this project could include a survey of ongoing work to

develop mutually acceptable sustainability criteria.
19

Annual Report 1998 } Cooperative Achievements

Biodiversity and Ecosystems

Cooperation in the Conservation of Birds of North America

This project brings together agencies and organizations that are working on the conservation of

birds, particularly non-waterfowl species, and helps them coordinate and enhance ongoing efforts

to conserve bird populations and their important habitats across North America. The project has

concentrated on identifying important bird areas (IBAs). In addition, in November 1998, more

than 125 experts from the three countries met in Puebla, Mexico, to review a concept paper that

had been drafted of a strategy and an action plan for the conservation of North American birds.

Based on the feedback provided by these experts, lines of action (or “themes”) were defined in

the areas of mapping, conservation objectives, monitoring, implementation, and financial support. This allowed the writing of a strategy for NABCI and an action plan for the CEC initiative.

These documents were to be submitted for Council approval in June 1999.

North American Biodiversity Information Network

The North American Biodiversity Information Network (NABIN) was initiated in 1996 to enhance

collaboration among biodiversity data sources and users in North America. NABIN seeks to provide a neutral venue for all stakeholders to promote availability of and accessibility to data on

biodiversity in North America. 

In 1998, a pilot effort focusing on data and information related to birds of North America was

completed and a second one was launched with a focus on mammals and fish. Special emphasis

was placed on expanding the circle of data users, increasing the depth of data and information

about birds, and broadening the taxonomic and geographical information.

As it develops, the information will be made available for adaptation in other countries in the hemisphere, leading to greater integration of NABIN with the Inter-American Biodiversity Information

Network (IABIN). Links are also being developed with other regional and global initiatives such as

the proposed clearinghouse mechanism of the Biodiversity Convention, Integrated Taxonomic

Information System (ITIS), Natural Heritage Programs, and the Conservation Data Centers.

As a virtual network of data owners and users, NABIN has no physical office space or 

permanent staff.

Pollutants and Health

Sound Management of Chemicals

This program is an ongoing intergovernmental initiative to reduce the risks of persistent toxic

substances to human health and the environment. An overall objective of the program is to provide a continuing and increasingly effective forum to facilitate cooperation, trinational agreements

and action on managing and reducing chemical pollution in North America. A key focus of the

Sound Management of Chemicals initiative (SMOC) has been the development of North American

Regional Action Plans (NARAPs) for those substances which the Parties agree warrant collective
20

regional action. To date, NARAPs have been established for DDT, chlordane, mercury and PCBs,

and implementation is underway. During the last year, four additional nomination dossiers for

five candidate substances have been undergoing review under the Process for Identifying Candidate

Substances for Regional Action. The Decision Documents for hexachlorobenzene, and dioxins

and furans were approved by the Working Group. In addition, a Capacity Building task force was

established to develop plans and advice that would guide capacity building in support of SMOC.

An Environmental Monitoring and Assessment concept paper was prepared and an experts workshop was held to seek advice on the feasibility of developing a NARAP in this area. The resulting

draft resolution for a proposed NARAP on Environmental Monitoring and Assessment was enthusiastically supported by the Working Group. It is also anticipated that a NARAP will be developed

for this cross-cutting initiative.

Cooperation on North American Air Quality

Activities planned for 1998 were revised to facilitate cooperation between the air pollution management systems of the three Parties, and to provide strategic tools necessary to reduce pollution

emissions on a trinational basis. Work was begun on the preparation of a reference document

concerning the air pollution management systems within the countries of North America. Improved

familiarity within the air pollution control community of the air pollution management systems

employed by each of the three North American countries is expected to facilitate cooperation and

coordination between the environmental regulatory agencies of the three countries. This reference document is expected to be published in the spring of 2000.

A US-Mexican pilot study, which was initiated in 1997 and continued through 1998, is helping

to establish a binational stakeholder-based alliance to address issues related to the San DiegoTijuana/Rosarito airshed and serve in an advisory capacity to Semarnap, the US EPA, and the

California Air Resources Board (CARB).

In order to develop policy recommendations for the reduction of mercury from coal-fired electric utility boilers, three activities were conducted in 1998. First, the CEC cosponsored a study

by the Ontario Clean Air Alliance (OCAA) to estimate the costs associated with switching the

source of electricity generation in Ontario from coal-fired boilers to natural gas combined-cycle

facilities and evaluate the pollutant benefits and resultant cost effectiveness of such a switch.

Second, a public workshop was convened to identify existing and emerging mercury control technologies applicable to coal-fired electric utility boilers and gain further insight into the reduction

potential of these control technologies, their costs, and the timeframe within which they could

be expected to become commercially available. Finally, a workshop of North American policyoriented air quality professionals was convened to consider available information, including that

developed in the first two described activities, in order to develop policy recommendations for

the control of mercury from coal-fired electric utility boilers. This information was then made

available to the three governments of North America as well as to the Conference of New England

Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers and the CEC Sound Management of Chemicals workgroup for consideration in the development and implementation of their mercury action plans.
21

Annual Report 1998 } Cooperative Achievements

North American Pollutant Release and Transfer Register

The North American Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (NAPRTR) project was initiated in

1995 to assist citizens in integrating and understanding the ramifications of data existing in these

North American registries. Helpful information can be found in PRTR reports from Canada and

the United States, but these systems have important differences between

them, so superficial comparisons can be misleading. The CEC, using

methodology specifically developed to allow comparison of the data, presents an analysis of the types and amounts of releases and transfers of

substances of concern across North America. In 1998, this project published the Taking Stock 1995 data report, initiated the annual Taking Stock

reports for 1996 and 1997, worked on the development of a trilingual

Internet site that would gather available information on other sources of

North American pollutant releases, continued support for Mexico’s developing PRTR system, and

initiated a trinational pilot project to demonstrate how PRTR information could be accessed and

used at the community level.

Capacity Building

Cooperation on the Protection of Marine and Coastal Area Ecosystems

Since 1996, the CEC has been facilitating regional implementation of the Global Programme of

Action (GPA) for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities in North

America through pilot projects in binational coastal areas. Working with agencies and citizen

groups, the CEC has helped establish two such projects, one in the Bight of the Californias and

the other in the Gulf of Maine. Work continued in the two areas in 1998 and, by a Council decision taken in 1998, the CEC will continue supporting the projects through the years 1999–2000,

acknowledging that while substantial progress has been made, these bilateral efforts take time to

evolve and consolidate. CEC support in 1999–2000 is necessary to assist regional stakeholders

in the transition from the GPA strategic planning process to implementation.

Work on the Bight of the Californias Pilot Project has included the establishment of the Bight of

the Californias Ad Hoc Committee as a binational, multi-stakeholder coalition of representatives

from federal, state and local agencies, nonprofit organizations, the academic and private sectors

and indigenous groups. The CEC sponsored three Ad Hoc Committee meetings during 1998, at

which regional implementation plans were finalized, action plan priorities established, and implementation steps launched. An in situ liaison was hired to facilitate communication between the

Ad Hoc Committee members and to assist in the coordination of the 1998 program of activities.

The project received funding from the Agency for International Development (US AID) to develop

a GIS-based point and nonpoint source pollution inventory for the Bight of the Californias. The

CEC supported the participation of Mexican scientists in the first Bight-wide marine monitoring

survey, producing an invaluable cross-border assessment of the state of the Bight, while the US

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the US Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) offered financial support for the laboratory analysis of Mexican samples.
22

Gulf of Maine Pilot Project activities also included the identification of a host institution in the

region to serve as secretariat to the GPA Coalition and the hiring of an in situ liaison. A specific

action plan has been developed, consistent with the GPA, to protect marine and coastal ecosystems in the Gulf of Maine.

Capacity Building in Pollution Prevention

The project is composed of two initiatives:

Capacity Building for the Sound Management of Chemicals. This initiative is continuing activities related to the implementation of the DDT regional action plan developed under the CEC

Sound Management of Chemicals project by identifying opportunities for funding the necessary

capacity-building initiatives. It also promotes technical cooperation.

Capacity Building for Pollution Prevention in Small and Medium-size Enterprises (SMEs).

This initiative is intended to meet the technical support needs of small and medium-size enterprises in Mexico, to initiate pollution prevention activities in industrial parks, and to promote the

Pollution Prevention Fund established by the CEC/Funtec/Concamin. Five pilot projects have

been initiated aimed at demonstrating the economic and environmental benefits of pollution prevention techniques and technology. These projects are in the tannery (two), glassmaking, dyeing,

and metal finishing (one each) industries. Initial steps have been taken with the Environmental

Defense Fund to link this project to activities in border-area industrial parks.

Law and Enforcement Cooperation

North American Regional Enforcement Forum

Ongoing support was provided to the North American Working Group on Environmental

Enforcement and Compliance Cooperation (Enforcement Working Group). This network of environmental enforcement and compliance officials serves as a regional forum for North America

on common issues. In addition to assisting the Parties in their annual report on enforcementrelated obligations, the Forum reviews issues of common concern and has enabled joint initiatives

and cost-shared projects including enforcement training.

Support was also given to enable enforcement officials to contribute their enforcement and compliance expertise to further work under the Sound Management of Chemicals project.

Strengthening Regional Capacity to Enforce CITES

Under the leadership of the North American Wildlife Enforcement Group (NAWEG), the wildlife

enforcement project in 1998 continued to focus on building regional capacity and expertise for

enforcing North American laws implementing the Convention on International Trade in Endangered

Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), particularly in joint training initiatives, establishing a

network of wildlife inspectors and building wildlife forensic capacity. Ongoing support by the CEC

has enabled wildlife enforcement agencies to strengthen contacts for cooperative action to enforce

CITES and to ensure a recognized regional voice in related international organizations such as

Interpol and the World Customs Organization. These contacts were aided by training exchanges,

funded by the CEC, in 1998. Under these joint initiatives, wildlife enforcement officials participated in each others’ training programs to facilitate the exchange of training information and

techniques among the agencies.
23

Annual Report 1998 } Cooperative Achievements

Among its activities over the past year has been the organization and staging of a regional conference on the trade in marine invertebrates. The conference focused on exchange of information

on trade patterns, the nature of illegal activities, and strategies to detect and deter illegal activity. 

Hazardous Waste Enforcement

Under the leadership of the CEC, a Hazardous Waste Task Group produced a needs assessment

report that surveys current North American government policies and programs for tracking and

enforcing laws regulating the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.

Environmental Management Systems and Compliance

In 1998, the Council adopted the report submitted by the Environmental Management Systems

(EMS) Task Group on preliminary findings and recommendations from a study on the relationship between voluntary EMS standards and government programs to enforce, verify and promote

compliance with environmental laws and regulations. Considerable time and effort was dedicated

to exchange of information and expertise on use of EMS and voluntary initiatives for enhancing

compliance with environmental legislation. Consultations were held with public and industry

interest groups on these issues. 

Compliance Indicators

This project has involved a cooperative, multi-stakeholder effort to analyze

indicators for measuring and evaluating the effectiveness of the enforcement

and compliance strategies of each Party. In 1998, the CEC sponsored a multistakeholder dialogue to examine current policies and practices for reporting

on, responding to, and evaluating enforcement and compliance with environmental laws, alternative indicators of effective enforcement, and compliance

strategies and responses. The proceedings of this leading-edge initiative,

Indicators of Effective Environmental Enforcement: Proceedings of a North American

Dialogue, which are available from the CEC, will serve as the baseline for

future work in selective testing and application of indicators.
24
Registry of

Submissions on

Enforcement

Matters 1998

ID. Number Submitters Status

SEM-97-001 BC Aboriginal Fisheries Commission, et al. Preparing a factual record 

SEM-97-002 Comité pro Limpieza del Río Magdalena Reviewing response from the Party 

SEM-97-003 Centre québécois du droit de l’environment Reviewing response from the Party 

(CQDE), et al.

SEM-97-006 The Friends of the Oldman River Reviewing response from the Party 

SEM-97-007 Instituto de Derecho Ambiental, A.C. (Chapala) Reviewing response from the Party 

SEM-98-001 Instituto de Derecho Ambiental, A.C. (Guadalajara) Reviewing under Article 14(1)

SEM-98-002 Hector Gregorio Ortiz Martínez Reviewing revised submission 

SEM-98-003 Department of the Planet Earth, et al. Reviewing revised submission

SEM-98-004 Sierra Club of British Columbia, et al. Reviewing under Article 14(2) 

SEM-98-005 Academia Sonorense de Derechos Humanos, Reviewing under Article 14(1)

A.C., et al.

SEM-98-006 Grupo Ecológico “Manglar”, A.C. Reviewing under Article 14(1)

SEM-98-007 Environmental Health Coalition, et al. Reviewing under Article 14(1)

25

Annual Report 1998 } Registry of Submissions on Enforcement Matters 1998
26

Registry of Submissions on Enforcement Matters 1998

Under Article 14 of NAAEC, the Secretariat may consider a submission from any nongovernmental organization or person asserting that a Party to NAAEC is failing to effectively enforce

its environmental law. Where the Secretariat determines that the Article 14(1) criteria are met,

it shall then determine whether the submission merits requesting a response from the Party named

in the submission under Article 14(2). In light of any response provided by that Party, the Secretariat

may recommend to the Council that a factual record be prepared, in accordance with Article 15.

The Council, composed of the environmental ministers (or their equivalent) of Canada, Mexico

and the United States, may then instruct the Secretariat to prepare a factual record on the submission. The final factual record is made publicly available upon a two-thirds vote of the Council.

As per section 15 of the Guidelines for submissions on enforcement matters, the Secretariat has

established a Registry to provide summarized information so that any interested organization or

person, as well as the Joint Public Advisory Committee, may follow the status of any given submission during the submission process envisaged under Articles 14 and 15 of NAAEC. As per

section 16 of the Guidelines, the Secretariat maintains a public file on each submission, subject

to confidentiality provisions of the Agreement and of the Guidelines. The Registry and the public file may be accessed through the CEC web site (<http://www.cec.org>) or directly at the

Secretariat offices (393, rue St. Jacques Ouest, bureau 200, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H2Y 1N9,

telephone (514) 350-4300). 

The following summary briefly describes events during 1998, concerning submissions on enforcement matters. For information on the current status of submissions, please consult the Registry

mentioned above.

Submission ID SEM-97-001/BC HYDRO

Submitter(s) BC Aboriginal Fisheries Commission, et al.

Party Canada

Date received 2 April 1997

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The Submitters allege that the Canadian government is failing to enforce the Fisheries Act, and

to utilize its powers pursuant to the National Energy Board Act, to ensure the protection of fish

and fish habitat in British Columbia’s rivers from ongoing and repeated environmental damage

caused by hydro-electric dams.

1998 Events:

1. On 27 April 1998, the Secretariat notified Council that it considered the submission warranted

preparation of a factual record. 

2. The Council instructed the Secretariat to develop a factual record, in accordance with Council

Resolution 98-07 dated 24 June 1998.

3. On 18 December 1998, the Secretariat provided the Submitters (and the Party, among others)

with a letter expressing the Secretariat’s interest in receiving (until 23 February 1999) 

information for consideration in the development of a factual record. 
27

Annual Report 1998 } Registry of Submissions on Enforcement Matters 1998

Submission ID SEM-97-002/RIO MAGDALENA

Submitter(s) Comité Pro Limpieza del Río Magdalena 

Party United Mexican States

Date received 15 March 1997

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The Submitters allege that wastewater originating in the municipalities of Imuris, Magdalena de

Kino, and Santa Ana, located in the Mexican state of Sonora, is being discharged into the Magdalena

River without prior treatment. According to the Submitters, the above contravenes Mexican 

environmental legislation governing the disposal of wastewater.

1998 Events:

1. On 8 May 1998, the Secretariat requested a response from the Party under Article 14(2).

2. The Response from the Party was received on 29 July 1998.

Submission ID SEM-97-003/QUEBEC HOG FARMS 

Submitter(s) Centre québécois du droit de l’environnement (CQDE), et al.

Party Canada

Date received 9 April 1997

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The Submitters allege a failure to enforce several environmental standards related to agricultural

pollution originating from animal production on the territory of the Province of Quebec.

1998 Events:

1. On 16 February 1998, the Secretariat made a request for information under Article 21(1)(b)

to the Party.

2. The response to the information request was provided on 13 May 1998.

Submission ID SEM-97-006/OLDMAN RIVER

Submitter(s) The Friends of the Oldman River

Party Canada

Date received 4 October 1997

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The Submitter alleges that Canada is failing to apply, comply with and enforce the habitat protection

sections of the Fisheries Act and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.
28

1998 Events:

1. On 23 January 1998, the Secretariat issued a Determination that the submission met the 

criteria under Article 14(1).

2. On 8 May 1998, the Secretariat requested a response from the Party under Article 14(2).

3. Canada’s response was received on 13 July 1998.

Submission ID SEM-97-007/LAGO DE CHAPALA

Submitter(s) Instituto de Derecho Ambiental , A.C.

Party United Mexican States

Date received 10 October 1997

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The Submitters allege that Mexico is failing to enforce environmental law, in connection with the

citizen complaint filed on 23 September 1996, concerning the degradation of the Lerma Santiago

River- Lake Chapala Basin.

1998 Events:

1. On 2 October 1998, the Secretariat requested a response from the Party under Article 14(2).

2. Mexico’s response was received on 15 December 1998.

Submission ID SEM-98-001/GUADALAJARA

Submitter(s) Instituto de Derecho Ambiental, A.C., in conjunction with the citizens affected by the

explosions of 22 April 1992

Party United Mexican States

Date received 9 January 1998

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The Submitters allege that Mexican Federal Attorney General and the Federal Judiciary did not

duly enforce the General Law on Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection (LGEEPA) in

relation to the explosions in the Reforma area of the city of Guadalajara, state of Jalisco.

1998 Events:

1. On 26 January 1998, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the Submission filed on 

9 January 1998.
29

Annual Report 1998 } Registry of Submissions on Enforcement Matters 1998

Submission ID SEM-98-002/ORTÍZ MARTÍNEZ

Submitter(s) Hector Gregorio Ortíz Martínez 

Party United Mexican States

Date received 14 October 1997 (supplemental information received 10 February 1998)

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The submission alleged “improper administrative processing, omission and persistent failure to

effectively enforce” environmental law in connection to a citizen complaint filed by the Submitter.

1998 Events:

1. On 25 February 1998, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the Submission filed on 

10 February 1998.

2. On 23 June 1998, the Secretariat issued a Determination under Article 14(1) of NAAEC, 

dismissing the submission.

3. On 4 August 1998 the Submitter filed a revised submission.

Submission ID SEM-98-003/GREAT LAKES

Submitter(s) Department of the Planet Earth, et al.

Party United States of America

Date received 27 May 1998

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The Submitters assert that the US Environmental Protection Agency’s regulations drafted and

programs adopted to control airborne emissions of dioxin/furan, mercury and other persistent

toxic substances from solid waste and medical waste incinerators violate and fail to enforce both:

1) US domestic laws, and; 2) the ratified US-Canadian treaties designed to protect the Great

Lakes that are partly referenced in the US Clean Air Act.

1998 Events:

1. On 2 June 1998, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the submission filed on 27 May 1998.

2. On 14 December 1998, the Secretariat issued a Determination dismissing the submission under

Article 14(1). The Submitters had a 30-day period to file a revised submission.
30

Submission ID SEM-98-004/BC MINING

Submitter(s) Sierra Club of British Columbia, et al.

Party Canada

Date received 29 June 1998

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The submission alleges a systemic failure of Canada to enforce the Fisheries Act to protect fish

and fish habitat from the destructive environmental impacts of the mining industry in British

Columbia.

1998 Events:

1. On 8 July 1998, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the submission received on 

29 June 1998.

2. On 30 November 1998, the Secretariat issued a Determination that the submission met the

criteria under Article 14(1).

Submission ID SEM-98-005/CYTRAR

Submitter(s) Academia Sonorense de Derechos Humanos, A.C., et al. 

Party United Mexican States

Date received 23 July 1998

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The Submitters allege that Mexico has failed to effectively enforce environmental law by having

authorized the operation of a hazardous waste landfill (CYTRAR) less than six kilometers away

from Hermosillo, Sonora.

1998 Events:

1. On 23 July 1998, the Secretariat received initial correspondence concerning this submission.

2. The Secretariat requested additional information from the Submitters on 29 July 1998.

3. The additional information, ratifying the submission, was received on 11 August 1998.

4. On 24 August 1998, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the submission.
31

Annual Report 1998 } Registry of Submissions on Enforcement Matters 1998

Submission ID SEM-98-006/AQUANOVA

Submitter(s) Grupo Ecológico Manglar, A.C.

Party United Mexican States

Date receive: 20 October 1998

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The submission alleges that Mexico is failing to effectively enforce its environmental laws with

respect to the establishment and operation of Granjas Aquanova S.A. de C.V., a shrimp farm in

Isla del Conde, San Blas, Nayarit, Mexico.

1998 Events:

1. On 20 October 1998, the Secretariat received initial correspondence concerning this submission.

2. The Secretariat requested additional information from the Submitters on 22 October 1998.

3. The additional information, ratifying the submission, was received on 4 December 1998.

4. The Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the submission on 8 December 1998.

Submission ID SEM-98-007/METALES Y DERIVADOS

Submitter(s) Environmental Health Coalition, et al.

Party United Mexican States

Date received 23 October 1998

Summary of the matter addressed in the submission:

The Submitters allege that Mexico has failed to effectively enforce its environmental law in connection with an abandoned lead smelter in Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico, that poses serious

threats to the health of the neighboring community, and to the environment.

1998 Events:

1. On 30 October 1998, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the submission filed on 

23 October 1998. 
32

Linking 

North

American

Communities

North American Fund for Environmental Cooperation

The North American Fund for Environmental Cooperation (NAFEC), which has made grants

totaling US$3.8 million, was created in October 1995 by the three North American environment

ministers to support community-based environmental projects across North America. 

In 1998, NAFEC made 28 grants totaling US$850,000 to nongovernmental organizations. The

grantees were chosen by the NAFEC Selection Committee, which has two representatives from

each country.

Grants made in 1998 fall primarily into four categories: (1) strengthening community capacity to

produce and market green goods and services; (2) transboundary efforts to protect habitat and

migratory species; (3) community-based management of water resources; and (4) citizen monitoring for pollution prevention and remediation. Many of the projects involve collaboration among

nongovernmental organizations in two or three countries.

In 1998, NAFEC increased its efforts to facilitate networking among NGOs in North America

and share the lessons learned through NAFEC-supported projects.

Part of this effort involved arranging three cluster meetings to bring together 1996 and 1997

grantees working on similar issues:

• Representatives of projects as geographically distant as Alaska and Quintana Roo met in

Amherst, Wisconsin in June. They found that they faced many common challenges in their

efforts to develop renewable energy and use it as a basis for sustainable development in

indigenous and isolated communities.
33

Annual Report 1998 } Linking North American Communities

• NAFEC grantees from across North America joined Samuel and Saidye Bronfman Foundation

grantees from across Canada for the conference Urban Issues 1998: Creating Sustainable

Urban Communities, held in October in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The participants shared information and strategies related to sustainable urban design, wastewater treatment, sustainability

indicators, green business and cross-cultural approaches to environmental issues.

• Preparations began for a Sustainable Production meeting to be held in Oaxtepec, Morelos in

March 1999. During the latter half of 1998, NAFEC grantees and other interested organizations

engaged in a process to identify the primary issues of concern for communities involved in producing and marketing green goods and services. This meeting also represents a first attempt to

build stronger links between NAFEC-supported projects and related CEC programs.

Many of the participants in the 1998 meetings have maintained contact and have begun to collaborate in a variety of ways. They note that resources can be used much more efficiently when

organizations can share information and build on the work of others.

Communicating with groups involved in similar efforts also serves as a source of motivation.

Sustainable Futures, a video documenting the work of six NAFEC grantees, sends a strong 

message that “other communities can do what we are doing”. A short version of the video was 

featured at the 1998 CEC Council Meeting and the full-length (40-minute) version will be released

in spring 1999.

By the end of 1998, thirty-five NAFEC-supported projects were completed and 63 grants remained

active. Many projects that received initial funding from NAFEC were able to find other sources

to continue their work; they keep in touch with NAFEC staff regarding their progress and provide information to other communities interested in undertaking similar efforts. This growing

network of community-based initiatives that spans the continent is one of the most exciting products of the NAFEC process.

Grants awarded in 1998 (all figures in US dollars): 

Promoting certified organic products in Mexico (Mexico) Asociación Mexicana de Inspectores

Orgánicos ($46,000) • Promoting biological diversity through sustainable certification and

fair trade (US/Mexico) Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy ($6,625) • Coffee with a cause:

lessons from the European experience (Canada) Action for Solidarity, Equality, Environment and

Development ($6,300) • Certification & marketing: organic agriculture, forest garden, nontimber forest products and timber forest products (Canada/Mexico/US) Falls Brook Centre

($50,650) • National assessment of non-wood forest products in the US (US) The Pacific Forest

Trust ($6,950) • Community capacity-strengthening for the sustainable use of natural resources

(Mexico) Comisión de Solidaridad y Defensa de los Derechos Humanos ($53,000) • Raising iguanas: a

strategy for their protection and conservation (Mexico) Ecología, Desarrollo y Medio Ambiente

($6,500) • A road to sustainability: social and ecological micro-enterprises in the hands of

poor women (Mexico) Coordinadora Interregional Feminista Rural Comaletzin ($27,500) • Green

herbal markets (Mexico) Ecología y Desarrollo de Tlaxcala y Puebla ($65,000) • Ecological fisheries management in the Bay of Fundy — writing the rules (Canada/US) Conservation Council

of New Brunswick ($58,500) • Training nature guides in protected areas of the Yucatan penin-
34

sula (Mexico) Pronatura Peninsula de Yucatan ($5,850) • Sonoran ecotourism project (US/Mexico)

Southeastern Arizona Bird Observatory ($57,000) • Community-based economic and ecological

conservation and restoration (Canada) Alberta Wilderness Association ($6,500) • Training for sustainability at the Sierra Gorda Biosphere Reserve (Mexico) Grupo Ecológico Sierra Gorda($50,000)

• Assessment of ranching methods on bird populations in Chihuahua and Durango

(US/Mexico) Colorado Bird Observatory ($20,000) • Important bird areas — Phase II (US) National

Audubon Society ($39,000) • Maritime important bird areas program (Canada) Canadian Nature

Federation ($37,650) • The Transamerica migratory bird fund: Conservation through community-based programming (Canada/Mexico) Saskatchewan Wetland Conservation Corporation ($6,500)

• The Caribou Commons project(Canada) Friends of Yukon Rivers ($5,850)• Yellowstone to Yukon:

conservation plans 2000 (Canada/US) Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society ($48,700) • A crash

course in conservation biology (Canada) Friends of Kananaskis Country ($11,000) • Communitybased conservation in the Northwestern Lake Superior landscape (US/Canada) Nature

Conservancy — Chicago/Great Lakes ($45,500) • Lower Colorado River basin conservation

plan–binational outreach project (US/Mexico) Defenders of Wildlife ($27,000) • Border water

roundtable (US/Mexico) Texas Center for Policy Studies ($33,000) • Clean water, healthy communities: community-managed waste treatment in central and southern Mexico (Mexico)

Espacio de Salud ($30,000) • US/Mexico Comparable Industries Study: identifying potential

risks and pollution prevention strategies (US/Mexico) Environmental Health Coalition ($47,000)

• Community solutions to toxic contamination (Canada/US) Sierra Club of Canada ($6,500)

• Migrant Farmworkers’ pesticide project (US/Mexico) The Farmworker Health and Safety Institute

($47,000) 
Country 

Reports

2
36

Canada

Article 2

General Commitments

Article 2(1)(a) State of the Environment Reports

Five updated bulletins in Canada’s National Environmental Indicator Series were published in 1998:

Toxic Contaminants in the Environment: Persistent Organochlorines; Climate Change; Urban Water: Municipal

Water Use and Wastewater Treatment; Sustaining Marine Resources: Pacific Herring Fish Stocks; and Canadian

Passenger Transportation.

The State of Canada’s Environment Infobase is accessible on the Internet at

<http://www1.ncrec.gc.ca/~soer/index_f.html>. This site includes the above-mentioned National

Environmental Indicator Series; The State of Canada’s Environment, which contains The State of Canada’s

Environment–1996, State of the Environment Fact Sheets, and Teacher’s Place, with online student activities related to Canada’s environment; and A National Ecological Framework for Canada,

featuring maps and descriptions of Canada’s terrestrial ecozones and ecoregions.

In 1998, the Pacific and Yukon Region of Environment Canada launched its Pacific and Yukon Region

Environmental Indicators Internet site, found at <http://www.ecoinfo.org/env_ind/default.htm>. 

The site currently has indicators for marine ecosystems, biodiversity, toxic contaminants, and

stratospheric ozone depletion.

The State of Canada’s Forests: The People’s Forests, 1997-1998 was published by the Canadian Forest

Service of Natural Resources Canada. The report is accessible on the Internet at

<http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/cfs/proj/ppiab/sof/common/latest.shtml>.

Country Report on Implementation of 

the Commitments Derived from the NAAEC 

The following report was submitted to the CEC Secretariat 

by Environment Canada in accordance with NAAEC.
37

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

The Health of Our Air: Toward sustainable agriculture in Canada was published by Agriculture and AgriFood Canada. The report is accessible on the Internet at <http://www.agr.ca/envire.html>.

Chemical Contaminants in Canadian Aquatic Ecosystems was published by the Department of Fisheries

and Oceans. The report provides an assessment of the effects of chemical contaminants on fish,

fish habitats, and fisheries resources in both freshwater and marine ecosystems of Canada.

Arctic Ozone: The Sensitivity of the Ozone Layer to Chemical Depletion and Climate Change was

published by Environment Canada. The report is accessible on the Internet at

<http://exp-studies.tor.ec.gc.ca/>.

In 1998, Quebec produced an overview of the province’s greenhouse gas emissions, a report on

the evolution of air quality over the last 20 years, and a status report on industrial wastewater

treatment. Several quality overviews for rivers, including sections of the Saint Lawrence River,

were also produced within the context of the Canada-Quebec Memorandum of Understanding

on the Saint Lawrence River.

Manitoba’s last State of the Environment Report was issued in 1997. A decision was made in 1998

to incorporate the report into the government’s new Sustainable Development Act and produce

a Sustainable Development Report.

Article 2(1)(b) Environmental Emergency Preparedness

A national database for storing historical and current spill data from various contributing spill

reporting agencies was significantly upgraded. The system serves as a useful tool for data analysis

and determination of spill trends. Access to outside organizations provides the potential to have

a nationally harmonized spill reporting system.

The Summary of Spill Events in Canada, 1984–1995 was published. It provides information on spill

trends for various government as well as private industry sectors for the period studied. It is a follow-up to the previous report, Summary of Spills Events in Canada, 1974–1983. The charts and tables

presented in the report identify key findings with respect to spills that impact on the environment.

Quebec dealt with 3,244 environmental emergencies, of which 1,171 necessitated intervention

in the field. The ice storm of January 1998 was the year’s most serious event, requiring the mobilization of several environmental emergency-response teams.

Manitoba experienced the “Flood of the Century” in 1997. In 1998, there was a review of the

provincial Emergency Management program and revisions were made to emergency procedures

of Manitoba Environment, as well as other departments, to reflect lessons learned from the 1997

experience. In particular, Manitoba Environment developed procedures for dealing with contamination from abandoned wells, and moisture problems in basements causing mold and mildew.
38

Canada/United States Transboundary Spill Response Mutual Aid Agreement. The

CANUSWEST agreement, developed in partnership with the US, deals with response to major

spills in the vicinity of the international border between the province of British Columbia and the

neighboring states of Idaho, Washington and Montana. This mutual aid agreement is the southern component of one of the five regional annexes to the Canada/US Joint Inland Pollution

Contingency Plan.

The Field Guide for Oil Spill Response in Arctic Waters was published on behalf of the Emergency

Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR) Working Group of the Arctic Council. The field

guide was developed to provide circumpolar countries with oil spill response guidance, including

practical oil spill response strategies and tools specific to the unique climatic and geographic features of the Arctic environment. The guide is being adopted by Canada, Denmark/Greenland,

Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, Sweden, and the United States.

Government/Industry Partnership: MIACC. Environment Canada is the federal government

lead and a key partner in the Major Industrial Accidents Council of Canada (MIACC). This is a

voluntary organization which provides a multi-stakeholder cooperative forum for all levels of governmental, industrial and nongovernmental sectors, with the objective of developing tools to

improve emergency prevention, preparedness and response practices among partner agencies.

MIACC launched the “Partnership Toward Safer Communities” initiative, which aims to bring to

the community level, where it can have the most impact, the concepts and principles of accidental prevention, preparedness and response. The initiative provides communities with information

on what hazardous substances are transported, stored and used within their respective boundaries. Citizens, local governments and industry use the information to work together to enhance

the level of preparedness to protect public health and safety from accidents at hazardous installations within their communities.

National Storage Tanks Inspection Program. In the province of British Columbia, a program

for inspecting aboveground and underground storage tanks containing hazardous substances was

implemented. Over 200 facilities were inspected in 1998 to assess the risk of hazardous substance

releases. Recommendations based on Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME)

guidelines were made to prevent spills. As a result, several facilities have been upgraded.

Article 2(1)(c) Environmental Education

Education for sustainable development was one of the major themes discussed at the Commission

for Sustainable Development (CSD) in 1998. Canada made a significant contribution at the CSD

as a result of its involvement in the Planèt’ERE Conference in Montreal, where nations of La

Francophonie met to discuss environmental education, and in the International Conference on

Education in Thessaloniki, Greece. Canada has now taken a lead in the development of a “Best

Practices” Registry with UNESCO. 

The Rescue Mission Planet Earth program continued for a third year. To date, over 100,000 Canadian

students have been involved in conducting assessments of the sustainability of their communities.
39

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

The Climate Change Action Fund (CCAF) has placed considerable emphasis on education by allocating funds to formal educational programs and activities. Building on the success of the Pembina

Institute and the Toronto Environmental Alliance, which developed curricula on climate change,

many Canadian groups are collaborating to offer Canadian schools the tools they require for making a real impact on consumption patterns. The Climate Change Action Fund, in 1998, approved

6 projects in support of climate change education. 

Climate Change Action Fund Projects

Project name Total budget CCAF 

contribution

Active and Safe Routes to School (Go for Green) $900,000 for three years $330,000

Alberta Pilot: National Initiative on Climate Change 

(FEESA/Destination Conservation) $149,000 for one year $64,000

Climate Change Teacher Support Programme 

(Pembina Institute) $239,000 for three years $120,000

Canadian CO2 Calculator 

(University of British Columbia) $371,875 for three years $222,875

Global Change Game 

(Global Change Game Inc.) $498,025 for three years $73,625

The Climate Change Action Pack 

(Scientists and Innovators in the Schools) $21,000 for one year $13,000

The first-ever online Colloquium on Environmental Education was hosted by Environment Canada,

Yukon College, Université du Québec à Montréal and the Canadian Journal of Environmental Education

in the fall of 1998. Over 100 scholars and researchers participated in this two-week event. The

results of the colloquium were to be published in the spring 1999 issue of the Canadian Journal of

Environmental Education.

Provincial Ministers of Education in Canada banded together to make sustainable development

education a classroom reality. With the assistance of Learning for a Sustainable Future, seven provinces

have been in the process of creating an inventory of existing curricula to determine what more

needs to be done in this area. For example, plans include the development of pre-service training for teachers.

In Alberta, a new environmental education program was initiated to engage students in learning

about aquatic ecosystems and, in particular, conservation of fish habitat. The program, called Fish

in Schools: Raise to Release, involves students in raising fish from the egg stage to the fry stage and

then releasing them into an approved water body. This hands-on educational program promotes

understanding of habitat issues, natural resource management and stewardship. The fisheries biologists of Alberta Environmental Protection [now known as Alberta Environment] are actively involved

in working with individual schools on this initiative.

Quebec developed and implemented an action plan for environmental education. In addition to

current publications on various environmental topics, a great deal of information is available on

the Quebec Environment Ministry’s Internet site: <www.mef.gouv.qc.ca>.
40

Article 2(1)(d) Scientific Research and Technology Development

The Environmental Technology Centre (ETC) undertook a variety of initiatives:

• It sustained the federal-provincial National Air Pollution Surveillance (NAPS) Network, for

monitoring criteria pollutants SO2, CO, NO2, and O3, and suspended particulate matter (PM).

• Air toxics monitoring was continued for: fine PM, O3, metals, volatile organic compounds

(VOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), polychlorinated di-benzo dioxins/furans

(PCDD/F), and acid aerosols.

• Releases from Canadian landfills were determined for PCDD/F, PAH, VOCs, Hg, NOx, sulphur compounds, and non-methane organic compounds. 

• A measurement Reference Method was developed to support the CCME National Emissions

Guidelines for NOx, SO2 and CO from combustion turbines and reciprocating engines.

• For use in setting regulatory control limits, studies were done on the Level of Quantification

(LOQ) for hexachlorobenzene in soil and ash, and PCDD/F in soil, ash and stack emissions.

• Environment Canada and the US EPA approved a ‘green’ (MAPtm) method for analytical 

sample preparation that can be used for measurement of over 100 pollutants in solid samples.

• The ETC, the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, and the US EPA 

investigated for the first time the real-world emissions from off-road construction equipment.

• The ETC led the development and acceptance of a North American (ASTM) performance 

testing protocol that covers most types and brands of commercial oil sorbents.

The Wastewater Technology Center (WTC) provided technical advice and undertook chemical

analyses to support Priority Substances List II work on chloramine and the textile sector. A study

of selected sewer-sheds and treatment technologies supported endocrine-disrupter work on

municipal wastewaters. Reference materials and analytical tools were prepared for the Canadian

Council of Ministers of the Environment. Technology protocols for the Environmental Technology

Verification Program were developed and tested. 

Quebec undertook three research projects dealing with technological development in 1998: municipal waste, cleanup of contaminated sites, and urban planning activities. It also created an

agro-environmental research and development institute.

Article 2(1)(e) Environmental Impacts

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) is responsible for administering the federal environmental assessment process. In 1998, CEAA managed one public review and, during

the same time period, federal departments and agencies reported 3,080 screenings and one comprehensive review, in accordance with their environmental assessment obligations under the

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.

In the province of Alberta in 1998, 26 major resource projects were subject to the environmental assessment process. Environmental impact assessments were completed in 1998 for nine

projects. Three of those nine projects were subsequently subject to public hearings in 1998.
41

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

In southern Quebec, 97 projects underwent environmental impact assessments: 46 of them landbased, one industrial and 40 water-based. Among the types of projects assessed were several

highway redevelopment projects, a paper mill, a magnesium plant, an aluminum smelter, an organic

waste incineration project, a project to eliminate PCB-contaminated waste, a co-generation plant,

two hydroelectric projects and three port maintenance dredging programs. Northern Quebec is

covered by the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement signed with the province’s aboriginal

communities. There, over 40 projects—including highway or industrial, and municipal—

underwent environmental assessments.

Article 2(1)(f) Promotion of the use of Economic Instruments for the Efficient Achievement of

Environmental Goals

Work continued on the Pilot Emissions Reduction Trading (PERT) project. Approximately 20

companies and environmental nongovernmental organizations (ENGOs) participated in 1998.

This initiative is industry-led and involves emissions reduction credits for VOCs, NOx, SOx and

CO2. Credits are created as a result of reductions from stationary, mobile and areas sources. A

company earns credits from early and excess reductions by adopting emissions-reducing processes

and technologies.

The 1998 Federal Budget proposed a measure to help ensure fairer treatment of charities that

operate deposit-refund systems promoting recycling of returnable beverage containers.

In 1998, work was undertaken on such economic instrument mechanisms as the Credit for Early

Action Table and emissions trading, both related to climate change. 

Quebec initiated a refundable tax credit program in the dry-cleaning sector, with a view to

reducing atmospheric emissions of perchloroethylene (PERC). To qualify for the tax credit,

dry-cleaners must first obtain a certificate from the provincial environment ministry attesting

that replacements or improvements made to equipment reduce the amount of PERC used,

thereby reducing emissions.

In 1998, Manitoba Environment initiated an inter-departmental review of Administrative Monetary

penalties as a tool to complement the provincial enforcement legislation. In March 1998, the

Minister of the Environment approved the Business Plan of the Manitoba Association for Resource

Recycling Corporation, which was established to achieve improved recycling of used oil, filters and

containers. This initiative is funded through a levy collected on the sale of these products. Under

the Used Oil, Oil Filter and Containers Regulation, all stewards must operate or subscribe to a

stewardship program. By the end of 1998, the program had succeeded in increasing the recovery

of materials.

Article 2(3) Prohibiting the Export of Pesticides and Toxic Substances

The substance (4-chlorophenyl)cyclopropylmethanone, O-[(4-nitrophenyl)methyl]oxime has

been added to the List of Toxic Substances (Schedule I) of the Canadian Environmental Protection

Act (CEPA) and to the Schedule of the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations. 
42

Article 3 

Levels of Protection

In 1998, Canada proposed and finalized the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations,

which prohibit the manufacturing, use, processing, offer for sale, and importation into Canada of

substances banned for reasons of environmental and health protection. An amendment was made

to the Gasoline Regulations which provided an exemption, in effect until 31 December 2002, for

all competition vehicles from the restriction on using leaded gasoline. 

The following regulations were also proposed in 1998: 

• the Sulfur in Gasoline Regulations, which reduce the concentration of sulfur in gasoline,

resulting in reduced emissions and decreased environmental and human health effects;

• the Federal Halocarbon Regulations, which place controls on the use of ozone-depleting 

substances and their alternatives for federal government departments; and

• the Ozone Depleting Substances Regulations, which consolidate all previous regulations and

require further reduction in hydrochlorofluorocarbons. 

Endangered Species Legislation. Before introducing federal endangered species legislation in

the House of Commons, the federal government conducted extensive consultations. Throughout

1998, federal, provincial and territorial governments held public workshops, information sessions, and consultations with interested Canadians concerning the federal species-at-risk initiative.

An electronic forum was also developed to facilitate consultations. Canadians were 

invited to access the forum at the Endangered Species in Canada web site (http://www.cwsscf.ec.gc.ca/es/endan_e.html). The federal government received input from landowners,

environmental groups, individuals, conservation organizations and aboriginal peoples. All proposals were given serious consideration during the drafting of the legislation. 

Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). Legislation to renew CEPA, Bill C-32, was

introduced in the House of Commons on 12 March 1998. Bill C-32 passed second reading and

was referred to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable

Development on 28 April 1998. This committee heard from industry representatives and NGOs

from the environmental and health sectors before it began its clause-by-clause review of the Bill

in autumn 1998. 

Pollution prevention forms the cornerstone of this proposed legislation, which provides the government with the authority to require pollution prevention plans from industry for substances

determined under the Act to be toxic. The new legislation would require the government to assess

substances more quickly and to take control actions within newly specified time periods on those

substances which pose a risk to the environment or human health. In addition, those substances

which are found to be toxic, persistent, bioaccumulative, and from sources of releases which are

predominantly anthropogenic will be targeted with a control action whose objective is the virtual

elimination of releases.
43

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

In order for Canada to meet its international obligations, Bill C-32 will provide the government

with the authority to implement the expanded obligations of the Basel Convention on the Control

of Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, as well as the authority to

implement the Convention on Prior Informed Consent for hazardous chemicals and pesticides

in international trade.

Harmonization. On 29 January 1998, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment,

with the exception of Quebec, signed the Canada-wide Accord on Environmental Harmonization

and related sub-agreements on environmental assessment, inspections activities, and the development of Canada-wide standards in areas such as air, water and soil quality. The Accord envisions

governments working in partnership to achieve the highest level of environmental quality for all

Canadians. Under the Accord, each government retains its existing authorities. Governments will

cooperate to achieve efficiencies in environmental management and increased environmental protection. The practical application of the Accord and sub-agreements will be worked out through

a series of bilateral and multilateral implementation agreements.

Alberta. Alberta completed significant revisions to its water management policy and legislation

in 1998. The Water Act focuses on managing and protecting Alberta’s water and on streamlining

administrative processes. The previous legislation was primarily a tool for allocating water. The

new Act has two regulations: the Water (Offences and Penalties) Regulation and the Water

(Ministerial) Regulation. The Act and Regulations will come into force 1 January 1999.

The vision of the Special Places program is to complete a network of protected areas to preserve the

environmental diversity of Alberta’s six natural regions and 20 subregions by the end of 1999. In

1998 alone, 19 new sites were designated and/or received significantly enhanced protection under

the Special Places program, contributing over 307,500 new hectares to the protected areas network.

Manitoba. A new Threatened, Endangered and Extirpated Species Regulation was promulgated

in Manitoba. Seven additional species will be protected.

Quebec. Quebec introduced a new soil protection and contaminated site restoration policy. In

addition to sections dealing with protection and restoration, this policy requires that contamination levels be registered with the land registry office. This measure will ensure that the condition

of a particular site and the consequent obligations toward it are available to the public.

A waste management action plan was also introduced, the end of which will see nearly 5 million

metric tons of waste collected, recycled and re-used.
44

Article 4 

Publication

The Government of Canada publishes all of its environmental laws, regulations, procedures and

administrative rulings.

The following regulatory initiatives were published in 1998:

• Amendments to the Gasoline Regulations (April) and the Prohibition of Certain Toxic

Substances Regulations (August) were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.

• The Sulfur in Gasoline Regulations (October), the Ozone Depleting Substances Regulations

(August) and the Federal Halocarbon Regulations (August) were proposed in the Canada

Gazette, Part II.

The Canada Gazette remains the official parliamentary journal of the federal government. However,

section 12 of the new CEPA proposes to establish a registry, to be called the Environmental Registry,

for the purpose of facilitating access to documents relating to matters under CEPA. The purpose

of the Environmental Registry would not be to replace the Canada Gazette but, rather, to complement it. The Registry would permit easier tracking of CEPA-related activities (e.g., consultations

regarding new regulations) by the public.

Article 5 

Government Enforcement Action

What’s New

• The new Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), re-introduced to Parliament, 

contains proposed provisions that would give to enforcement staff additional powers and 

to the Department additional tools to respond to violations. 

• The National Enforcement Management Information System and Intelligence System 

(NEMISIS) was further developed and improved. 

• Environment Canada, along with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and enforcement agencies from the United States, Germany, Holland and the Basel Secretariat,

developed a “Train the Trainer” course for environmental crimes, under the auspices of

Interpol. Part of the course includes an international training video, shot partly on location in

Canada, to instruct police agencies around the world in how to deal with environmental

crimes such as the smuggling of hazardous waste and ozone depleting substances.

• Environment Canada’s Enforcement Branch unveiled its new homepage at the Environment

Canada web site: <www.ec.gc.ca/enforce/homepage/default.htm>.

• A major national workshop for EC enforcement staff was held, at which agreement was

reached to strengthen EC’s National Enforcement Program in several key areas. This resulted

in an initiative comprising fifteen major projects. The key projects relate to the decisionmaking process, human resources management, intelligence-gathering capacity, and the

assessment of present and future resource requirements.
45

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

• In April 1998, Manitoba Environment passed a new Livestock Manure and Mortalities

Management Regulation under the Environment Act, the intent of which is to strengthen

protection of the environment, to enhance enforcement capabilities and to ensure that 

livestock production will be sustainable.

• The Compliance Division of Alberta Environmental Protection, created in 1998, is responsible

for the development of a compliance assurance framework to ensure consistent, harmonized

and effective delivery of compliance assurance activities by the Environmental Service, the

Natural Resources Service, and the Land and Forest Service of the department. This framework will ensure that compliance assurance and enforcement activities are predictable, fair

and timely. Rules, sanctions, and processes will be securely founded in law.

Compliance and Enforcement

In 1998, Environment Canada, Quebec Environment and Wildlife, Manitoba Environment, and

Alberta Environmental Protection continued to have similar approaches to compliance promotion and enforcement of environmental and wildlife legislation. They promote voluntary compliance

under both areas of enacted legislation by using a variety of means, including meetings with the

regulated community, bulletins, brochures for targeted audiences, information on the Internet,

and publication of the names of violators convicted by the courts. 

The monitoring of compliance is aided by the permits, licenses and other authorizations that

are required for many activities, such as the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes,

international trade in endangered species, hunting and trapping, and those activities that pose

a risk of releasing contaminants into the environment. For example, in FY 97/98, EC processed

approximately 9,000 notices for proposed transboundary shipment of hazardous wastes. The

resulting shipments numbered approximately 40,000, each of which could be tracked via its

quadruple manifests. 

Environment Canada, Quebec Environment and Wildlife, Manitoba Environment, Manitoba

Natural Resources, and Alberta Environmental Protection conduct training programs for new

inspectors, investigators, and wildlife officers. Courses include: general inspection techniques,

expert witness courses, regulations-specific courses, and advanced investigation techniques.

Refresher courses are also offered to enforcement staff. Specialized training courses dealing with

new pieces of legislation are developed by the parties for their respective enforcement staff. For

example, during FY 97/98, EC provided various enforcement training sessions for approximately

250 individuals. During the last two fiscal years, Manitoba Environment sent 37 enforcement staff

members to the RCMP Law Enforcement Investigator’s Course. 

On-site inspections as well as “administrative verifications” (off-site inspections such as the verification of obligatory information sent in by regulatees) are undertaken to confirm compliance

with regulations. Investigations are conducted when noncompliant situations are discovered. Each

year, in cooperation with its five regional offices, Environment Canada prepares an inspection plan

that targets specific elements of the regulated community. Such a plan is formulated on criteria that

include: the number and types of targeted populations or activities; the profiles, compliance histories, operational complexity and capacities of the target companies; the environmental significance

and geographic scale of their operations; and the nature of the applicable regulatory provisions.

Likewise, Alberta Environmental Protection and Manitoba Environment prepare comparable plans
46

for their respective jurisdictions. Quebec Environment and Wildlife follows a systematic inspection program for the industrial, municipal, agricultural, and natural resources sectors. As well,

careful response is given to tips, complaints and referrals offered by the public. In addition to many

other inspections which took place over the course of FY 97/98, approximately 6,000 were conducted by EC’s Wildlife Inspection staff under the federal Wild Animal and Plant Protection and

Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act, which implements Canada’s commitment to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

Some regulations, both provincial and federal, require that regulatees keep records for inspection

purposes and submit them for verification to the appropriate authority on a timely basis.

All parties maintain records of key enforcement activities, including inspections, investigations,

warnings issued, and prosecutions. In the case of EC, a new computerized enforcement database

called NEMISIS (National Enforcement Management Information System and Intelligence System)

is now being used for these purposes. There is a legislated requirement for Environment Canada

to report to Parliament annually on the execution of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act

(CEPA) and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial

Trade Act. Alberta Environmental Protection also has a computerized database that tracks enforcement activities, including incident reviews, inspections and investigations. Likewise, both Quebec

Environment and Wildlife and Manitoba Environment maintain records of similar enforcement

activities through manual record-keeping systems. For example, the Environmental Service of

Alberta Environmental Protection recorded approximately 5,700 inspections, 210 investigations,

and 5,598 incident reports. During FY 97/98, Manitoba Environment recorded 17,596 inspections

and 3,166 complaints.

Enforcement of environmental and wildlife legislation for all parties is conducted within the context of the overall Canadian legal framework, which includes the Canadian Charter of Rights and

Freedoms, the Canadian Criminal Code, the Privacy Act, and the Canada Evidence Act. Most federal and provincial environmental and wildlife legislation provides for the authority to search, seize

and detain under the rules established by legislation. Companies operating in Quebec are also

subject to the jurisdiction of that province’s own Civil Code. 

All parties make noncompliance information available to the public, but do so in a variety of ways.

Quebec Environment and Wildlife periodically communicates information on prosecutions on a

pro-active basis. Manitoba Environment provides enforcement information on the Internet at

<www.gov.mb.ca/environ/prgareas/enforce.html>. Environment Canada does the same at

<www.ec.gc.ca/enforce/homepage/english/info.htm>. Both also supply noncompliance information on request, as well as issue news releases for selected prosecutions and court decisions.

Alberta Environmental Protection issues news releases for Enforcement Orders, Environmental

Protection Orders, Court Orders and prosecutions. As well, annual summaries and statistics on

enforcement actions are compiled and made available to the public. Alberta Environmental

Protection’s Land and Forest Service disseminates information on noncompliant actions via

the Internet at <www.gov.ab.ca/env/forests/fmd/contra/contra99.html>.
47

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

Compliance and enforcement policies are widely published or otherwise made available to the

public and the regulated communities. These policies outline the basis for fair and consistent

enforcement, the enforcement process, administrative roles, investigative authorities, assessment

of compliance, and the criteria for enforcement options. 

Mediation as a means to persuade transgressors to conform is available in a number of ways.

Federally, the existing CEPA, Fisheries Act, and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation

of International and Interprovincial Trade Act do not provide for mediated or negotiated settlements. The new CEPA, however, which is currently before Parliament, proposes environmental

protection alternate measures (EPAMs) that will be negotiated as enforceable agreements between

alleged offenders and the Crown. As well, similar processes are proposed in new wildlife legislation currently being prepared—the Species at Risk Act. 

Quebec environmental and wildlife legislation does not provide for the possibility of mediation.

However, following the discovery of an infraction and the issuing of a warning, the transgressor

is granted reasonable time to come back into compliance. 

In Manitoba, the Contaminated Sites Remediation Act contains provisions that promote mediation as a dispute resolution procedure. Similarly, the practices and procedures of Alberta’s

Environmental Appeal Board provide for dispute resolution through the use of mediation 

and arbitration. Information on the Appeal Board can be found at its web site at

<www.gov.ab.ca/foip/pubs/abdir/eab.html>. 

Under the new CEPA, if passed as proposed, enforcement would be aided by environmental protection compliance orders (EPCOs) that are similar to “cease and desist” orders found elsewhere

in Canadian law.

Although the circumstances may vary, all parties currently have authority to issue warnings and

orders of a preventative and curative nature.

Environment Canada Enforcement Information. Enforcement information, reports, and statistics for CEPA and the federal wildlife legislation can be found on Environment Canada’s web site

at <http://www.ec.gc.ca/enforce/homepage/english/index.htm>. The tables in the following 

section summarize enforcement information from the provinces: Quebec (Table 1), Alberta (Tables

2 and 3), and Manitoba (Tables 4 and 5).
48

Provincial Enforcement Information

Table 1: Quebec Environment Ministry

Regulatory Enforcement Statistics—1998

Complaints Infraction Requests for ConvicLegislation Inspections Treated Notices Inquiries tions Fines

Sector: Municipal

Water collection and distribution 52 1 7 0 0 0 

directive (D.001)

Sewer system (D.004) 28 6 7 2 0 0

Policy on the protection of riverbanks, 758 139 121 27 0 0

shorelines and floodplains (r.17.1)

Regulation respecting solid wastes 1,226 119 287 32 43 $26,000

(r.3.2)

Regulation respecting drinking 112 11 113 8 4 $900

water (r.4.1)

Regulation respecting the storage of 60 5 6 4 0 0

used tires (r.6.1)

Regulation respecting water and 51 10 16 5 0 0

sewer companies (r.7)

Subtotal: Municipal 2,287 291 557 78 47 $26,900

Sector: Industrial

Mining industry (D.019) 106 0 14 1 0 0

Rehabilitation of contaminated sites 531 35 49 10 0 0

policy (P.002) 

Regulation respecting pulp and paper 77 1 6 0 0 0

operations (R.12)

Regulation respecting pulp and paper 263 10 56 2 8 $21,900

operations (R.12.1)

Regulation respecting quarries and 886 104 155 26 9 $14,400

sand pits (R.2)

Regulation respecting atmospheric 399 80 84 11 43 $38,500

quality (R.20)

Regulation respecting ozone-layer 494 1 57 2 1 $5,000

depleting substances (R.23.1)

Regulation respecting bituminous 118 4 9 2 0 0

concrete plants (R.25)

Regulation respecting biomedical 166 0 25 0 0 0

waste (R.3.001)

Regulation respecting hazardous 1,438 53 225 22 0 0

waste (R.3.01)

Subtotal: Industrial 4,478 288 680 76 61 $79,800
49

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

Complaints Infraction Requests for ConvicLegislation Inspections Treated Notices Inquiries tions Fines

Sector: Agriculture

Prevention of air pollution from 52 2 9 0 0 0

livestock operations (D.038)

Regulation respecting the prevention 1,953 145 390 45 25 $46,100

of water pollution in livestock 

operations (r.18)

Subtotal: Agriculture 2,005 147 399 45 25 $46,100

Sector: Pesticides

Regulation respecting pesticides (r.1) 195 3 64 0 0 0

Pesticides (D.017) 14 0 1 0 0 0

Subtotal: Pesticides 209 3 65 0 0 0

Sector: Other

Other interventions not designated 673 71 78 5 0 0

by regulations, policies or directives

Environmental Quality Act, 1,981 218 342 107 171 $413,250

activities not falling under regulations,

policies or directives

TOTAL 11,633 1,018 2,121 311 304 $566,050
50

Table 2: Alberta Environment Enforcement Activities, Prosecutions*

Charges 

Charges Con- Convic- Jail Suspen- Court

Legislation Laid1 cluded2 tions Pending3 Penalties4 Days5 sions6 Appeals7 Orders

EPEA8 and Regs 58 138 52 15 $1,133,885 45 0 16 0

Subtotal

EPEA 43 117 38 14 $1,132,305 45 0 16 0

Pesticides sales, 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

handling

Waste control 12 19 14 0 $1,580 0 0 0 0

Substance release 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Fisheries Act and 1,341 1,177 1,017 427 $166,132 0 0 6 9

Regs Subtotal

Fisheries Act 35 46 31 33 $18,650 0 0 2 0

Alberta Fishery 1,306 1,131 986 394 $147,482 0 0 4 9

regulations

Wildlife Act and 1,498 1,406 1,007 788 $339,260 1,508 365 30 66

Regs Subtotal

Migratory birds reg 25 26 9 0 $4,350 0 11 0 0

Wildlife Act 1,383 1,298 924 767 $320,217 1,508 354 30 66

Wildlife reg 90 82 74 21 $14,693 0 0 0 0

Forests Act and 69 7 6 9 $516 0 0 0 0

Regs Subtotal

Forests Act 69 7 6 9 $516 0 0 0 0

Prov. Parks Act and 351 51 41 38 $4,522 0 0 0 0

Regs. Subtotal

Provincial Parks Act 351 51 41 38 $4,522 0 0 0 0

Other Acts and Regs. 1,573 657 520 184 $79,667 276 0 0 0

Subtotal

Criminal Code 45 59 18 39 $3,684 120 0 0 0

Gaming and Liquor Act 761 257 223 64 $29,088 6 0 0 0

Highway Traffic Act 356 89 76 20 $5,506 0 0 0 0

Motor Vehicle 136 88 74 24 $32,949 150 0 0 0

Administration Act

Off-Highway Vehicle 211 92 85 4 $5,297 0 0 0 0

Act

Provincial Offences 33 44 16 31 $1,348 0 0 0 0

Procedures Act

Small Vessel Regs. 31 28 28 2 $1,795 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 4,890 3,436 2,643 1,461 $1,723,982 1,829 365 52 75

These data cannot be compared to each other or to lighter shaded portions of this table.

* 1 April 1998 – 31 March 1999

1 Includes all charges laid during the report period.

2 Includes only those charges that have been concluded. Some of these charges may have been initiated prior to the report period.

3 Includes charges laid before or during the report period that have not been concluded.

4 Includes penalty and creative sentencing amounts.

5 Does not include days in lieu or default days.

6 Includes licenses (under Wildlife Act), approvals.

7 Includes appeals of charges to higher-level court.

8 Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act.
51

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

Table 3: Alberta Environment Enforcement Activities, 

Administrative Penalties and Orders*

Penalty $ 

Legislation Penalty #s1 Assessed Orders2 Appeals3

EPEA4 and Regs Subtotal 34 $165,250 4 3

EPEA 28 $144,000 3 –

Pesticides sales, handling 5 $18,750 – 3

Waste control 1 $2,500 1 –

Forests Act and Regs Subtotal 50 $151,463 0 0

Forests Act 8 $28,290 0 –

Timber Management reg 42 $123,173 0 –

Prov. Parks Act and Regs Subtotal – – 262 –

Provincial Parks Act n/a n/a 262 n/a

Public Lands Act Subtotal 54 $101,795 0 0

Public Lands Act 54 $101,795 – –

TOTAL 138 $418,508 266 3

* 1 April 1998 – 31 March 1999

1 Indicates number of parties who received an administrative penalty.

2 Environmental Protection Orders (EPO), Emergency Environmental Protection Orders (EEPO), Enforcement Orders (EO), Enforcement Orders

(Waste), Eviction Orders, Ministerial Orders.

3 Includes administrative penalties and orders appealed through EAB for EPEA legislation and administrative penalties appealed to a Director 

for Forestry and Public Lands legislation.

4 Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act.
52

Table 4: Manitoba Environment Enforcement Statistics —

1997/98 Fiscal Year

Formal Director/EO/

Charges Warnings MOH Orders Fines

Legislation Laid Convictions Issued Issued Imposed

The Dangerous Goods Handling and 62 62 22 2 $14,685

Transportation Act

The Environment Act 66 49 198 27 $24,226

The Non-Smokers Health – – 12 – –

Protection Act (NSHPA)

The Ozone Depleting Substances Act – – 2 – –

The Public Health Act 12 7 75 12 $1,258

Municipal bylaws 1 1 31 – Nil

TOTAL 141 119 340 41 $40,169

Table 5: Manitoba Environment Program 

Operating Statistics: 1997/98

Program Activity (Mandated) Number of Inspections Complaints Responded To

Public Health Act 

Food service establishments 3,560 423

Temporary/seasonal food service 386 8

Retail food stores 545 134

Mobile food units 124 4

Food processors 1,047 136

Uninspected meat processors 69 5

Public water supply 406 65

Swimming facilities 567 4

Industrial & construction camps 31 8

Recreational camps 189 24

Public accommodation 137 24

Care facilities 492 20

Subtotal 7,553 855
53

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

Program Activity (Mandated) Number of Inspections Complaints Responded To

Environment Act

Waste disposal grounds 601 89

Livestock production operations 547 160

Municipal wastewater facilities 433 41

Scrap processors and auto wrecking 97 19

Agricultural operations 146 34

Mining operations 33 1

Forestry operations 3 15

Manufacturing and industrial plants 170 56

Recreational developments 8 –

Incinerators 22 2

Water development/other EA licenses 345 10

Subtotal 2,437 427

Dangerous Goods Handling and 

Transportation Act 

Petroleum storage facilities 1,159 76

Pesticide storage and container facilities 135 39

PCB storage facilities 6 1

Anhydrous ammonia 70 12

Hazardous wastes sites 283 81

Dangerous goods handling and transportation 219 6

Contaminated sites 331 19

Subtotal 2,203 234

Request/Response-oriented Programs

Subdivision, landsplits, planning schemes and 792 149

development plans

Litter 894 730

Campgrounds 16 4

Dwellings and buildings 1,340 137

Private water supplies 788 150

Unsanitary conditions 159 159

Communicable disease investigations 115 68

Private sewage disposal 872 182

Other (crop residue, ozone, Waste Reduction 

and Prevention Act, NSHPA) 427 71

Subtotal 5,403 1,650

TOTAL 17,596 3,166
54

Manitoba Natural Resources Enforcement Statistics—FY 97/98. Approximately 139 Manitoba

Natural Resources enforcement officers are responsible for enforcement of wildlife protection

and other legislation. They are assisted in their job by the province’s “Turn-in-Poachers” toll-free

hotline, which, since it began in 1985, has received 9,191 calls, resulting in 1,534 charges and

285 warnings. During FY 97/98, 421 prosecutions were pursued, resulting in 348 convictions,

with an additional 119 warnings issued, to total 540 offenses. Of these, 19 offenses were related

to possession of illegally taken wildlife, with one charge laid under the trafficking provisions of

the Wildlife Act. Manitoba regulations require the procurement of import permits for all live animals brought into the province and export permits for all animals shipped out. Non-Manitoba

residents may use a valid hunting license as an export permit for species not regulated by CITES.

In all other cases, an export permit is required. In FY 97/98, 2,159 CITES export permits 

were issued.

Other Related Activities. Environment Canada actively participated in the International

Organization for Standardization (ISO) process for the development of the ISO 14000 series of

standards, including the three related to environmental auditing. Although these standards are

voluntary, not mandatory, the federal government encourages their adoption and implementation

by the private sector. 

To facilitate the practice of environmental auditing, Environment Canada, as a matter of policy,

does not request copies of environmental audits during its inspection activities. The Office of the

Auditor General of Canada encourages federal departments and agencies to adopt and implement

environmental auditing practices as part of their sustainable development plans. Quebec

Environment and Wildlife does not promote environmental audits, but encourages the adoption

of environmental management systems by all companies operating in its territory. Manitoba

Environment may include monitoring or auditing as a condition of obtaining environmental

licenses. Alberta Environmental Protection has encouraged the development of environmental

management systems by industry, including environmental audits. These are taken into consideration in assessing enforcement actions in situations of noncompliance.

Article 6 

Private Access to Remedies

Persons with a recognized legal interest have access to remedies before administrative tribunals

and the courts. Interested persons may also put forth, to a competent authority, a request to investigate alleged violations of environmental laws and regulations.

For example, CEPA provides specific statutory authority for a person to apply to the Minister of

the Environment for an investigation concerning any alleged environmental offense under that Act.

As well, persons with a recognized legal interest in a particular matter have access to administrative, quasi-judicial and judicial proceedings for the enforcement of Canada's environmental laws

and regulations. In this regard, CEPA provides the statutory authority to sue for damages, seek

injunctions and request the review of administrative decisions or proposed regulations. In the legislation to renew CEPA, Canada has built on its commitment to provide private access to remedies.
55

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Canada

Article 7 

Procedural Guarantees

Canada has administrative, quasi-judicial and judicial proceedings available for the enforcement

of environmental laws and regulations. Both the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and

the courts have ensured that persons are given an opportunity, consistent with the rules of procedural fairness and natural justice, to make representations to support or defend their respective

positions and to present information or evidence. Decisions are provided in writing, are made

available without undue delay and are based on information or evidence on which the parties were

offered the opportunity to be heard. In accordance with its laws, Canada provides parties to such

proceedings, as appropriate, the right to seek review and, where warranted, correction of final

decisions by impartial and independent tribunals. One example of fair, open and equitable proceedings at the administrative level is the Board of Review process available under the old CEPA

and expected to be included under the new CEPA as well.
56

Mexico

Article 2

General Commitments

Article 2(1)(a) State of the Environment Reports

As established by the collaborative agreement signed 5 July 1995, the National Institute of Statistics,

Geography and Informatics (Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática—INEGI) and

the Secretariat of Environment, Natural Resources and Fisheries (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente,

Recursos Naturales y Pesca—Semarnap) published Environmental Statistics, Mexico 1997 (Estadisticas del

Medio Ambiente, Mexico 1997), the biennial report in which both institutions collaborated.

The publication fulfilled Semarnap’s legal mandate to prepare the Report on the General Situation

of Mexico in Matters of Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental Protection (Informe sobre la

Situación General de México en Materia de Equilibrio Ecológico y Protección al Ambiente). This summary

report broadens the availability of public information related to the nation’s environment and

natural resources in matters such as population, economy, general environmental conditions and

statistics, human settlements and activities as well as environmental management in Mexico.

Article 2(1)(b) Environmental Emergency Preparedness

As a result of the forest fires in various regions of the country in 1998, work was done with personnel from the Secretariat of Health to monitor particulate matter PM10 and PM2.5 in the states

of Chiapas, Guerrero, Oaxaca, México, Tabasco and Yucatán in order to evaluate air quality and

possible impacts on health.

Country Report on Implementation of 

the Commitments Derived from the NAAEC 

The following report was submitted to the CEC Secretariat 

by the Secretariat of Environment, Natural Resources 

and Fisheries (Semarnap) in accordance with NAAEC.
57

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Mexico

As part of the commitments acquired within the Metropolitan Environmental Commission, testing was done for volatile organic compounds such as benzene, toluene and xylene in the metropolitan

gasoline service stations of the Valley of Mexico before and after the installation of vapor recovery systems, in order to determine their impact on the reduction of emissions and exposure to

these pollutants.

One of the projects undertaken by the Federal District of Mexico City’s government in coordination with the Secretariat of Health was the study of a cross-section of primary school children

from the Valley of Mexico to determine their exposure to pollutants such as ozone and PM10 in

the various microenvironments where they carry out their daily activities.

In a similar case, the Mexican Petroleum Institute (Instituto Mexicano del Petróleo), the National

Center for Public Health (Centro Nacional de Salud Pública) and the Council for Environmental

Conservation and Assessment (Consejo para la Conservación y Valoración Ambiental), collaborated in a

study of volatile organic compounds and PM10 found in different points in the Valley of Mexico

and made the results available to the public.

The Official Mexican Standard (Norma Oficial Mexicana) NOM-111-ECOL-1998, establishing

requirements and minimum specifications for safety and operations in high-risk activities, 

was written.

With regard to the Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (Registro de Emisiones y Transferencia de

Contaminantes), training courses were held for the industrial sector, discussing the methodology

for measuring and estimating pollutants included in the Annual Certificate of Operation (Cédula

de Operación Annual—COA), as well as possible uses and applications of this information in pollution prevention measures. This was accomplished through the support of the United Nations

Institute for Training and Research and the College of Environmental Engineers of Mexico (Colegio

de Ingenieros Ambientales de México, A.C.). There were also thirteen training courses provided for

national industry and Semarnap personnel linked to the COA. 

In June 1998, the Pollution Prevention Work Group held round tables with the participation of

local, state and federal authorities, as well as technicians and maquiladora industry directors, who,

in coordination with the Mining Chamber of Mexico (Cámara Minera de México), prepared a course

on business aspects of pollution prevention projects. In this context, a workshop was held in

February to evaluate the risks of mercury in Zacatecas, as well as another workshop related to

volunteer initiatives to reduce the use of the substance in products and processes. 

Article 2(1)(c) Environmental Education

The Secretariat of Public Education (Secretaría de Educación Pública—SEP) worked to include themes

of environment and sustainable development in fourth and fifth grade natural sciences text books,

as well as in the development of the Environmental Education Curriculum for Secondary School

Teachers (Paquete didáctico de educación ambiental para profesores de secundaria), which will form part

of the training offered at the 300 centers for SEP teachers. Likewise, there is a continuing effort

to produce materials to guide educational training, such as rulers imprinted with environmental
58

statistics. The Latin American Institute of Educational Communications has produced spot

announcements on Water and Environmental Contingencies, transmitted by satellite through 31,000

SEP antennas. The Globe Program has trained 80 high school teachers from the National

Autonomous University of Mexico (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México—UNAM), the National

College for Professional Technical Education (Consejo Nacional para la Educación Profesional Técnica—

Conalep) and the Colegio de Bachilleres of Mexico City and the State of México, and installed a

special classroom to assist instructors from participating schools.

In coordination with various public and private universities, 19 formal academic events were held:

training courses, specialty workshops, symposia, international forums and workshops, conferences and colloquia on the environment, sustainable development, environmental education,

conservation, natural resource management and ecodevelopment, as well as other subjects.

Thirteen regional courses and 61 state-level courses were organized for the training of 2,500 public servants in high priority environmental issues, such as environmental legislation, strategies for

the conservation of protected natural areas, fishery policies, planning and social participation,

identification of wildlife with potential for commercialization, tools for geoprocessing, and soil

restoration and conservation.

In the area of informal environmental education, the participation of groups and social sectors in

environmental management continued to be strengthened. Among the notable activities were: 

• granting of the 1998 Award for Ecological Merit in the academic, corporate and social sectors;

• development of the Award for Merit in National Forestry, as well as support for SEP’s

National Award for Indigenous Youth;

• organization of the National Competition for Alternative Technology (Certamen Nacional de

Tecnologías Alternativas) and the National Youth Contest for Rural Development Projects (Concurso

Nacional Juvenil de Proyectos de Desarrollo Rural) in order to encourage mid-level high school students to carry out applied technology projects for the improvement of the environment;

• support for the work of environmental educators, including the First Workshop on Institutional

Consolidation of the Central Mexican Region Network; statewide forums in Oaxaca,

Aguascalientes, Michoacán and Nuevo León; and the Second National Conference of Networks; 

• preparation of the Manual for Environmental Educators and Promoters and the organization

of pilot environmental workshops; the manual will be co-published through the United

Nations Environment Program (UNEP);

• publication of books on environmental themes for young people, as well as three special editions of Chispa magazine, all in collaboration with the Mexican Society for the Advancement

of Science and Skills (Sociedad Mexicana para la Divulgación de la Ciencia y la Técnica); 

• production of UNAM radio and television programs on consumption and the environment,

Agenda XXI and commercial forestry plantations; 

• support for governments and local groups in Tabasco and Aguascalientes to develop their

State Agendas for Environmental Education;
59

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Mexico

• numerous promotional activities carried out by the federal delegations of Semarnap during

Holy Week, World Environment Day, Arbor Day and other relevant dates;

• training programs on sustainable development, legal issues, responding to charges and 

complaints, natural resources, industrial verification, and environmental audits;

• organization of the conference Development of Regional Training Teams, with the participation of grassroots organizations and local communities; and 

• 236 courses for over 7,000 rural producers on priority issues and regions.

The Secretariat of Agrarian Reform (Secretaría de la Reforma Agraria), the Program for the Promotion

and Organization of Sustainable Development in Ejidos and Rural Communities (Programa de Fomento

y Organización para el Desarrollo Sustentable en Ejidos y Comunidades Rurales), and the Secretariat of

Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Rural Development (Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería y Desarrollo

Rural) collaborated in economic conversion programs as well as with SEP in the training of producers in sustainable management of fishery and forest resources. Training operations were also

provided for various public organizations and agencies such as the Central Light and Power Company

(Compañía de Luz y Fuerza del Centro), Integral Family Development (Desarrollo Integral de la Familia),

the National Institute for the Aged (Instituto Nacional de la Senectud), the Mexican Air Force (Fuerza

Aérea Mexicana), the Secretariat of National Defense (Secretaría de la Defensa Nacional) and the Institute

for Security and Social Services for State Workers (Instituto para la Seguridad y Servicios Sociales para

los Trabajadores del Estado).

In order to reinforce the development of environmental education, work was jointly carried out

with UNAM on the study Progress in the Field of Environmental Education Research, and with

the National Polytechnic Institute (Instituto Politécnico Nacional) on the study Analysis of Curricular

Profiles and Implementation of Environmental Education Programs.

In order to update the national diagnosis of training priorities for environmental management,

natural resources and fisheries, a methodology was designed to identify educational and training

needs in matters of sustainable development, as well as mechanisms for ranking them. Using these

instruments, three regional workshops were held on Management of Instruments for the

Identification of Training Needs and Criteria for Setting Action Priorities, aimed at those in charge

of the areas of education and training in Semarnap’s federal offices in the states of Sinaloa,

Michoacán and Oaxaca. Furthermore, in order to formulate training strategies for incorporating

the principles of sustainable development in forestry development, aquaculture and watershed

management, three studies were also carried out aimed at representatives of producer and community leadership organizations. 

The state government and municipal authorities of Hidalgo coordinated to carry out a study along

with an operational experiment to design an educational strategy for the development of environmental management promoters. This is intended to encourage and strengthen processes of

social organization for sustainable management of natural resources in areas of economic and 

ecological potential.
60

Through the Secretary of Tourism (Sectur) and the National Institute of Ecology (INE), an educational strategy was developed for the establishment of agents from the institutional and social

sectors to plan and operate low-density ecotourism projects as an alternative measure toward

community development. A national meeting and three local meetings were held at El Vizcaíno

and Mariposa Monarca biosphere reserves as well as in the Lagunas de Zempoala National Park. 

Article 2(1)(d) Scientific Research and Technology Development

In order to encourage research in the field of environmental legislation compliance, the Research

Program on Environmental Legislation: Enforcement and Compliance was established, as part of

the General Collaborative Agreement signed with the National Council for Science and Technology

(Consejo Nacional de Ciencia Tecnología—Conacyt). As part of this program, 11 projects were provided with the resources to begin their research in 1998. From June through September 1998,

project directors presented preliminary technical reports with results from their research; these

will be evaluated by specialists in each area.

In the area of technology, the Program for the Modernization of the Fishing Fleet is looking into

the replacement or renovation of the fleet. This would be done without increasing the current

size of the fishery effort, in strict accordance with the scientific and technical criteria that specify the biological capacity of the resource, in order to guarantee the sustainability of the activity.

The goal of the program is to achieve the modernization of 1,300 shrimp boats from throughout

the country (600 replaced and 700 renovated) by the end of the 1996–2000 period.

During 1998, the primary activities of the National Center for Environmental Research and Training

(Centro Nacional de Investigación y Capacitación Ambiental—Cenica) were focused on putting the laboratory equipment donated by the government of Japan into operation; supporting the process of

standardization of the INE; participating in the analysis of air quality in various cities of the nation;

reinforcing studies of personal exposure to atmospheric pollutants; and furthering an exchange of

knowledge through international conferences on hazardous waste and atmospheric pollution as

well as the dissemination of this information through the publication of papers and reports.

In the course of 1998, three studies were conducted that will strengthen the nation’s analytic

capacity for rational management of priority toxic substances: comparative exchange between

environmental laboratories; establishment of methods for analyzing polychlorinated biphenyls,

mercury, and organochlorine pesticides; and establishment of methods for sampling priority toxic

substances in different environmental matrixes. These projects will allow methods of sampling

and analysis of these substances to be standardized at the national level; they will also serve as a

cornerstone for improving the analytic quality of Mexican laboratories and consolidating their

process of standardization.

The data collected since 1997 from the automated atmospheric monitoring station has been used

to evaluate air quality and to carry out comparative studies with nearby stations of the Automated

Atmospheric Monitoring Network (Red Automática de Monitoreo Atmosférico—RAMA).
61

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Mexico

An environmental report on the tortilla industry in the Valley of Mexico was prepared in coordination with the Maseca company and the Autonomous Institute of Ecological Investigations (Instituto

Autónomo de Investigaciones Ecológicas).

As part of the formation of technical teams in the areas of hazardous wastes and atmospheric pollution, an international workshop, five courses, two colloquia, and four public lectures on

atmospheric pollution were organized. Highlights included an international workshop on automobiles and atmospheric pollution, an international colloquium on personal exposure to

atmospheric pollutants, an international forum on refuse incineration, a course on the Single

Environmental License (Licencia Ambiental Única) and courses in applied environmental statistics

and on methods for the evaluation of toxicity using Daphnia magna and Panagrellus redivivus.

Article 2(1)(e) Environmental Impacts

In 1998, five collaborative agreements were set up with various institutions in order to expedite

the procedures for the submission of environmental impact evaluation projects. Requests for evaluation were received for 10 risk assessment studies related to new technologies for management

of hazardous wastes, 122 high risk activity studies and 137 risk assessment studies for operating

plants, as well as 20 accident prevention programs. During this same period we took in 966 environmental impact studies for evaluation; out of these, 400 were approved.

To finalize and publish the new regulations concerning environmental impact evaluations from

the General Law of Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental Protection (Ley General del Equilibrio

Ecológico y la Protección al Ambiente—LGEEPA), meetings have been held since September 1998

with the Corporate Coordinating Council (Consejo Coordinador Empresarial), environmental organizations, the Secretariat of Commerce and Industrial Development (Secretaría de Comercio y Fomento

Industrial—Secofi) and the Secretariat of Tourism.

For purposes of consolidating, broadening and diversifying our technical assistance to the productive sectors with the greatest demand for environmental impact evaluation, meetings to follow

up on projects were held with the Mexican National Oil Company (Petróleos Mexicanos––Pemex),

the Federal Electricity Commission (Comisión Federal de Electricidad—CFE), the National Water

Commission (Comisión Nacional del Agua—CNA), Secofi, the Secretariat of Communications and

Transportation (Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes—SCT), Sectur, the National Trust Fund

for the Advancement of Tourism (Fideicomiso del Fondo Nacional de Fomento al Turismo—Fonatur),

the Secretariat of Social Development (Secretaría de Desarrollo Social—Sedesol), the Chamber of

Propane Gas Distributors (la Cámara de Distribuidores de Gas LP), the National Association of the

Chemical Industry (Asociación Nacional de la Industria Química), the Energy Regulatory Commission

(Comisión Reguladora de Energía) and the National Chamber of the Fishing Industry (Cámara Nacional

de la Industria Pesquera), among others.
62

In keeping with the federal government’s decentralization policies, a study has been prepared of the

infrastructure and technical capacity of Semarnap’s federal delegations at the state level, in order to

determine the possibility of decentralizing the function of environmental impact evaluation.

Regarding dissemination and public information programs, including project summaries submitted to the Procedure for Environmental Impact Evaluation, INE has completed publication

on its web site of all projects submitted since 1997. 

Article 2(1)(f) Promotion of the use of Economic Instruments for the Efficient Achievement 

of Environmental Goals

In this area, an effort has been undertaken to make environmental regulation more efficient and

cost effective, seeking the implementation of economic incentives and administrative improvements that will generate environmental markets and help launch programs in management and

the use of economic instruments.

During 1998, these lines of action were advanced:

• The Intersecretarial Commission for the Control of Processing and Use of Pesticides, Fertilizers

and Toxic Substances (Comisión Intersecretarial para el Control del Proceso y Uso de Plaguicidas,

Fertilizantes y Sustancias Tóxicas—Cicoplafest ), the SCT and the National Insurance and Finance

Commission (Comisión Nacional de Seguros y Fianzas) worked jointly to create a proposal to provide insurance and financing for environmental impact studies and for the transporting of

hazardous waste and materials, a measure currently in process until regulations for environmental impact and hazardous materials, waste and activities are modified and approved. 

• In the fiscal arena an accelerated depreciation proposal was presented that should stimulate

the introduction of technologies and processes to reduce pollutant emissions. Regarding the

zero tariff, the government worked to update the list of pollution control and prevention

equipment, meeting the criteria for this fiscal incentive, and created, together with Secofi

and the industrial sector, the mechanism to facilitate the requests for importation of this type

of equipment. Studies were also carried out on administrative improvements; these identified

the most viable alternatives for promotion of fiscal reforms in the ecological field, as well as

sensitizing activities that will lead to further proposals for these kinds of instruments.

• Several modifications to the Federal Law of Rights (Ley Federal de Derechos—LFD) were put

into effect. These basically consist of adjustments, as well as the pursuit of new laws more

congruous with the regulation in force, especially in the areas of wildlife and hazardous

waste, in order to articulate a System of Environmental Law. 

• Proposals were also made to set in motion a deposit-return system for used tires, used oil

lubricants, and batteries for domestic use and cellular phones.
63

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Mexico

Article 2(2) Implementation of Council Recommendations in Accordance with Article 10(5)(b)

During the period covered by this report, preparation of Official Mexican Standards was ongoing:

this involved NOM-042-ECOL-1996, establishing maximum permissible emission limits for new

vehicles, and NOM-041-ECOL-1996, which establishes the maximum permissible emission limits for vehicles already in circulation.

A review of Standard 083 on hospital waste was undertaken. Progress was made with the Standard

098 working group on waste incineration as well as with the contaminated soil restoration working group.

In collaboration with the Secretariat of Health, the Air Quality Standards for Ozone 

(NOM-020-SSA1-1993) were reviewed and updated. A review was also conducted of 

NOM-EM-125-ECOL-1998, which establishes the specifications for environmental protection

and prohibits the use of chlorofluorocarbons in the manufacture and importation of electric refrigerators and freezers for domestic use, water coolers, water cooler/heaters, drinking water

cooler/heaters with or without refrigerating compartments, commercial refrigerators and room

type air conditioners.

Article 2(3) Prohibiting the Export of Pesticides and Toxic Substances

Mexico is complying ahead of schedule with international environmental goals regarding substances

that deplete the ozone layer. The control mechanisms applied include both the normal customs

requirements for importation and the stipulations of the agreement that establish the classification

and codification of merchandise subject to regulation by the agencies that comprise Cicoplafest.

A company that imports chlordane into Mexico submitted to Cicoplafest its declaration of voluntary withdrawal from registration once it had used up its stock of the pesticide. A workshop

was held in McAllen, Texas, for the purpose of analyzing possible biological and chemical 

substitutes for the product. 

Close intergovernmental cooperation between Mexico and the United States was pursued in order

to exchange information regarding the cross-border movement of chlorofluorocarbons and to

train inspectors in the detection of illegal shipments of these substances.
64

Article 3 

Levels of Protection

In Mexico the preservation, reestablishment, propagation, distribution, acclimatization or refuge

of populations of threatened or endangered species is guaranteed through the establishment or

modification of seasonal exploitation parameters based on the criteria for the preservation of the

species, as established by Article 79 of LGEEPA. Likewise, Article 87 prohibits the exploitation

of threatened or endangered species, except in those cases where controlled reproduction and

the development of their populations can be guaranteed.

During 1998, 12 season closure notifications were issued for shrimp, lobster, abalone, tuna and

other species of fish and amphibians, as well as for the incidental capture of dolphins, in order to

protect them from commercial depredation.

During the same period, 14 official standards were published: maximum permissible limits of

solid and compound sulfur particles; waste water discharges to sewage systems; volatile organic

compounds originating from auto body coatings; emergency standards for the use of chlorofluorocarbons in refrigerators; unburned hydrocarbons released from automobiles; environmental

protection specifications for planning, design or construction of electric substations; electrical

transmission lines; mining exploration; seismological prospecting in agricultural zones; installation and maintenance of transportation systems; drilling of petroleum wells in agricultural zones;

and establishment of maximum emission limits for automobile exhaust, as well as emergency standards to characterize the equipment and measurement procedures for verification of automobiles

using natural gas or other alternative fuels.

Also published were four official decrees establishing protected natural areas with the status of

National Parks, in Puerto Morelos, Quintana Roo; Isla Contoy, Yucatán; Arrecifes de Sian Ka’an,

Quintana Roo; and Huatulco, Oaxaca. Two decrees were issued declaring biosphere reserves in

Tehuacán-Cuicatlán, Puebla, and Los Tuxtlas, Veracruz. A decree was published creating an area

of protected flora and fauna in Metzabok, Chiapas; another for a natural area in Naha, Chiapas;

and one more declaring several areas affected by wildfires ecological restoration zones. 

Article 4 

Publication

Important progress has been made in enforcing compliance with environmental standards, thanks

to the continued effort to improve the legislative and constitutional framework through the creation of new laws and regulations. The amendments to Articles 4 and 25 of the Political Constitution

of the United States of Mexico are among the most outstanding in that they recognize every person’s right to an environment adequate for their development and wellbeing and establish the

state as the authority responsible for guaranteeing that the development of the nation should

accordingly be comprehensive and sustainable.
65

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Mexico

New Forestry Law regulations were approved, and were published in the Official Gazette of the

Federation (Diario Oficial de la Federación) on 25 November 1998. These new regulations, which

supersede those of 21 February 1994, seek to strengthen the instruments set in place by the

Forestry Law. They clarify and complement administrative regulation by improving security measures and sanctions to discourage potential offenders from committing unlawful forestry acts,

while at the same time encouraging sustainable forestry utilization, regulating forested areas to

minimize environmental impact and facilitating the participation of the social sector by granting

legal protection to those who carry out these activities.

It should be pointed out that in both modifications a consensus was sought through national and

regional public workshops, which included the participation of the executive and legislative branches.

During this year, work also continued on the analysis and refinement of the LGEEPA regulations

pertaining to high-risk materials, wastes and activities; atmosphere; environmental impact; environmental audits; and protected natural areas.

Society’s interest in the environment is on the increase, leading the Congress of the Union and

local congresses to establish important forums for discussion on a variety of themes, including:

• Forest fires and ecological restoration of affected areas

• Toxic waste site at Sierra Blanca

• Climate change

• Biodiversity and ecotourism

• Monarch butterfly

• Hydrological policies and the Lerma-Chapala watershed

• Protecting the reefs of Quintana Roo

• Salt works project at Laguna de San Ignacio

• Hazardous waste landfill in Sonora (Cytar) 

Article 5 

Governmental Measures for the Enforcement of Environmental

Laws and Regulations

During 1998, four agreements were published: reforms and additions to various resolutions on

the procedures for obtaining the Single Environmental License, and updating of emissions information through the COA to reinforce the functioning of the Pollutant Release and Transfer Register;

modifications to the appendixes of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species

of Wild Fauna and Flora; setting of the guidelines of the Program for Ecological Restoration to

avoid changes in land use in areas affected by forest fires; and establishment of the 1998–1999

calendar for hunting seasons and exploitation of ornamental and song birds.
66

The instruction manual for the submission, monitoring and follow-up of action programs for the

improvement of wastewater quality was published. This will be distributed throughout the country.

During the period from August 1992 through December 1998, 80,341 inspection visits were

made to industries throughout the nation; of these, 2,320 resulted in partial closures and 557 in

total closures. There were 60,884 cases found to have minor violations and 16,580 to have no

violations. In 1998, exhaustive inspections were carried out to verify compliance of the measures

imposed, leading to higher rates of industry compliance. This can be attributed to two factors:

• greater corporate commitment to compliance with environmental standards in force; and 

• greater presence of environmental authorities and more effective actions in the field.

Table 1: Inspection Visits to National Industry 

August 1992– January– December 

Visits and Results December 1998 December 1998 1998

Performed 80,341 9,590 536

Mexico City metropolitan area (MCMA) 25,949 1,575 88

Rest of the country 54,392 8,015 448

Partial closures 2,320 107 0

MCMA 763 5 0

Rest of the country 1,557 102 0

Total closures 557 45 1

MCMA 65 1 0

Rest of the country 492 44 1

Minor violations 60,884 7,357 409

MCMA 19,936 1,202 58

Rest of the country 40,948 6,155 351

Without violations 16,580 2,081 126

MCMA 5,185 367 30

Rest of the country 11,395 1,714 96

Sources: Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection (Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiente—Profepa), Assistant Federal Attorney for Industrial

Verification (Subprocuraduría de Verificación Industrial), Directorate for Industrial Technical Assistance (Dirección General de Asistencia Técnica

Industrial).

Concerning inspection and monitoring of fishing resources, in 1996 it became obligatory for

shrimp vessels to use turtle exclusion devices in their nets. During 1997 and 1998, their installation was verified in 1,900 vessels, representing 100 percent of the national fleet. Thus the country

is complying entirely with its own standards as well as with international legislation in this area.
67

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Mexico

Also, inspections were strengthened for off-season fishing. Regarding compliance with the official shrimp season, during 1998 187.22 (metric) tons of product were seized because of the

violation of closed season. Profepa reported 131 alleged violators to the National Public Ministry

(Ministerio Público Nacional). 

In reference to the responsibility for monitoring and preservation of forestry resources, in 1998

117 Social Vigilance Committees were formed. With this additional monitoring support, greater

attention can be paid to verifying the type and extent of forestry use in critical priority areas of

the states of Chiapas, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Durango, México/Distrito Federal, Oaxaca and

Veracruz. In this way, the substantial labor commitments involved in inspections goes farther. Thus

in 1997–98 over 5,500 inspections were performed.

During the 1995–1998 period, inspections and monitoring to verify compliance with the standards for utilization of wild flora and fauna increased more than threefold, growing from 808

inspections in 1995 to more than 3,250 in 1998. This translates into more than a 350 percent

increase in the seizures of specimens between 1995 and 1998, and a 92.8 percent increase in

1998 over those in the first year. Likewise, the number of seizures of products and byproducts in

1998 was 101.9 percent of that in 1995.

Following the guidelines of the natural resource inspection program in ports, airports and 

borders, from 1996 through December 1998, 220,790 verifications of compliance with regulations for cross-border trade of forest products and wild flora and fauna specimens, products and

byproducts were carried out. Between January and December 1998, in the area of international

cross-border trade in forest products and wild flora and fauna specimens, products and byproducts,

34,905 inspections in ports, airports and borders were performed, resulting in the seizure of 

469 products and byproducts and 162 rejections of live specimens, including some endangered,

threatened, rare or protected species. 

One of the most important tasks of this program was the establishment between February and

July of a sanitary enclosure for plywood imported from Indonesia, allowing for the verification of

2,282 shipments containing 89,977 cubic meters of wood, equivalent to 2,000 containers.

With respect to environmental impact verification, more than 2,000 inspections over a wide range

of projects have been performed; 687 (33 percent) of these were carried out in 1998, especially

in those regions of the country where economic activities—particularly tourism—represent significant challenges to the environment and the equilibrium of ecosystems.

Finally, in reference to the maritime-terrestrial federal zone, 781 inspections were carried out.

Among other results, these actions translated into 1,086 administrative procedures, of which 474

(43.6 percent) were renewed in 1998. This implies an increase in inspection and verification

actions as well as in their effectiveness, as a growing number of legal and administrative procedures are seen that are due to the inappropriate utilization of the federal maritime-terrestrial zone

or to use violations as established by the appropriate authorities. 
68

Article 6 

Accessibility of Proceedings to Private Citizens 

The December 1996 reforms to LGEEPA recognize the right of all people to bring complaints pertaining to environmental crimes, as stipulated in the Federal District Penal Code, in matters of

common law and nationally in matters of federal law. In accordance with this, the collaboration of

the Federal Attorney General is sought regarding charges of activities involving toxic wastes that

endanger public health, natural resources, flora, fauna or ecosystems that have been carried out

without authorization or in violation of the terms under which an authorization has been granted.

Environmental audits have become a commonly used environmental management instrument

allowing industry to voluntarily comply with its environmental obligations, including aspects that

may not be regulated by Mexico but fall within international parameters or are drawn from standard engineering practices. In 1998, 165 audits were initiated, with 170 concluded and 296 action

plans drawn up with industrial enterprises, demonstrating growing effectiveness in the work of

upgrading and achieving compliance with environmental legislation.

By December 1998, 1,051 companies had entered the National Environmental Auditing Program,

as illustrated in the table below.

Table 2: National Environment Auditing Program 

Clean 

Compliance or Industry 

Completed Audits in Action Plan Compliance Action Plan Certificate

Audits Process in Creation Phase Completed Received

987 64 234 511 271 237

Companies that joined the program between 1992 and 1998 have invested an approximate total

of US$1.5 billion dollars in comprehensive environmental management improvements and in

compliance with preventive and remedial programs as a result of environmental auditing processes.

Also, the non-supervised auditing process was begun, using auditors approved by the Committee

for the Evaluation and Approval of Environmental Auditors. This allowed total responsibility for

this work to be legally delegated to the auditors themselves, leading to a 30 percent decrease in

the cost of audits.

After considering the human effort involved, the many investments made by the industrial sector,

and the various requests by industrial and corporate organizations, it was resolved to extend the

validity of the Clean Industry Certificate from one to two years, thereby eliminating the cost of

the annual re-examination. As a result, renewing the certificate is now possible without a new

audit by means of a review to confirm that the company has maintained or improved its level of

compliance. This has reduced costs from 30 to 60 percent. 
69

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: Mexico

By December 1998, a total of 237 companies had been certified. These represent a diverse group

of industries from both the private and public sectors, including 25 Pemex refineries and Pemex

Petrochemical facilities. In fact, all of the facilities of the larger public companies, such as Pemex,

CFE, and the National Railroads of Mexico, are participating in this program.

Article 7 

Procedural Guarantees

National legislation complies with the procedural guarantees established in Article 7 of the North

American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation. Although there were no legislative modifications affecting these guarantees in 1998, as a result of the 1996 reforms to LGEEPA, affected

individuals who have filed for administrative review through a recurso de revision may seek further

review by other competent jurisdictions of any decisions rendered by the agency concerning such

an administrative review.

Currently, such remedies are granted to physical persons and legal entities who may not be directly

affected by the action of the authorities concerned, but who have a general interest in the action. 

The administrative and jurisdictional remedies to which individuals have access in environmental matters are: citizen complaint (denuncia popular), administrative appeals, judicial review

overturning a previous judgment (juicio de nulidad), as well as a direct or indirect judicial review

under constitutional law (juicio de amparo). 
70

United 

States

Article 2

General Commitments

Article 2(1)(a) State of the Environment Reports

Air Emission Standards. On 24 April 1998, EPA released a draft report reviewing whether more

stringent emissions standards (“Tier 2 standards”) for light-duty motor vehicles (passenger cars

and light trucks) are appropriate. Although the study made no final determinations, it indicated

that further reductions in air pollution (particularly from ozone and particulate matter) due to

use of such vehicles were needed. It further indicated that reductions in light-duty-vehicle emissions were both feasible and cost-effective, relative to other ways of reducing air pollution. The

draft study also focused on the need to reduce sulfur levels in gasoline and the need to significantly tighten restrictions on emissions from light trucks, such as minivans and sport utility vehicles.

These light trucks have not been regulated as stringently as passenger cars, while becoming a much

larger portion than formerly of the overall pool of motor vehicles in the United States.

Status of Marine Fisheries: Report to Congress. In 1998, the National Marine Fisheries Service

(NMFS) submitted its second annual report to Congress on the status of marine fish stocks. NMFS

determined that 90 species are overfished, 10 are approaching an overfished condition, while another

200 species are not overfished. Data from the report will be used by national and regional fishery

managers as they finalize plans to end overfishing and rebuild the depleted fisheries.

The annual report to Congress is an ongoing examination of the status of the nation’s marine fisheries, and takes into account both improvements and declines in fish stocks. The report and marine

fish stock rebuilding efforts are required under the amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Act

passed in 1996. The report is available on the Internet at <http://www.nmfs.gov>.

Country Report on Implementation of 

the Commitments Derived from the NAAEC 

The following report was submitted to the CEC 

Secretariat by the US Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) in accordance with NAAEC.
71

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: United States

1997 Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) Annual Report to Congress. In 1998, NMFS

published the 1997 MMPA Annual Report to Congress. This report provides NMFS’ constituents with

information about its programs and activities relative to marine mammal conservation, management and recovery under the MMPA and the Endangered Species Act. This and past MMPA Annual

Reports to Congress can be found on the NMFS Office of Protected Resources web site at

<http://www.nmfs.gov/prot_res>.

Managing the Nation’s Bycatch. Bycatch, the unintended capture or mortality of living marine

resources as a result of direct encounter with fishing gear, has become a central concern of the

commercial and recreational fishing industries, resource managers, scientists and the public. In

June 1998, NMFS published its plan to address bycatch in US fisheries. The plan assesses the

extent of the problem and details national goals, objectives and recommendations for the reduction and minimization of bycatch.

Fisheries of the United States. In 1998, NMFS also published its annual Fisheries of the United

States. This publication provides data on US commercial and recreational fisheries catches in US

waters and foreign Exclusive Economic Zone waters. It also provides US fisheries import and

export data. The report is available on the Internet at <http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/index.html>.

State of the Coast Report. On 15 February 1998, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA) released to the public the State of the Coast Report, a major effort to identify the key national coastal and marine ecosystem problems and solutions. The State of the Coast

Report is actually an interactive system, based primarily on a World Wide Web site, that permits

a dialogue between segments of the various “communities”—government, industry, scientists,

researchers, and the public—involved in coastal issues. The heart of the Report is a series of essays

on the conditions of various coastal areas, pressures that impact the coastal and marine environment, and how damage in some areas has been prevented or repaired. In addition, NOAA is also

using the State of the Coast Report system to deliver technical reports and other information needed

by people directly involved in the business of managing and studying coastal and marine resources.

The report is available on the Internet at <http://state-of-coast.noaa.gov>.

Year of the Ocean Discussion Papers. As part of their Year of the Ocean activities, the federal

agencies with ocean-related programs prepared a set of discussion papers on a variety of themes

and cross-cutting issues. These papers discuss what is working well and what is not in ocean

resource management, and identify needs and opportunities for the future. They were intended

to provide some of the background information needed to enable both the public and private sectors to work together to promote the conservation, exploration, and sustainable use of the ocean.

National Dialogues. The National Ocean Service began a series of National Dialogues with its

coastal partners to define the nature of coastal stewardship, formulate NOS’s stewardship role, and

address long-term coastal management issues. The National Dialogues encourage systematic

approaches, interactive problem-solving, and partnership-building, and foster a sense of community among stakeholders. As part of this effort, the Stratton Commission Roundtable was convened
72

in May 1998 to compare and contrast the ocean policy issues facing the nation today with those of

30 years ago. The work of the original 1969 Stratton Commission led to the enactment of the 1972

Coastal Zone Management Act and the creation of NOAA, among other achievements. Leaders

from government, academia, industry, and environmental organizations offered their interpretations of lessons learned since the original commission and made recommendations to rejuvenate

and potentially realign the nation’s ocean and coastal policies and programs.

Article 2(1)(b) Environmental Emergency Preparedness

In June 1999, EPA will be receiving chemical risk information from over 66,000 facilities, including those in the US-Mexico border area. The Risk Management Plans (RMPs) of the facilities will

include information on inventories of hazardous chemicals, chemical processes, and past chemical accidents. EPA will be analyzing this chemical risk information to determine high-risk areas and

establish a strategy for reducing chemical risks in those areas. Along the US-Mexican border, the

sister cities of Brownsville/Matamoros, Eagle Pass/Piedras Negras, and Laredo/Nuevo Laredo have

developed and implemented joint sister-city contingency plans which identify procedures for mitigating the effects of chemical accidents in those local areas. These contingency plans have been

developed using chemical information from the US Emergency Planning and Community Rightto-Know law and will be supplemented with chemical risk information from the RMP program.

Toxics Release Inventory

1996 TRI Data. The US EPA published the 1996 TRI Public Data Release in May 1998. The aggregate on-site and off-site releases for the over 600 chemicals and chemical categories equaled 1.09

billion kilograms. Of this total, 59.7 percent of the releases went to air, while 12.1 percent was

transferred off-site for disposal. Reporting facilities managed 8.04 billion kilograms in productionrelated waste on-site, while transferring 1.45 billion kilograms off-site for further waste management.

The result is that the total production related waste totaled 10.6 billion kilograms.

The 1996 TRI data showed continued reductions in the releases of chemicals reported to TRI.

Between 1995 and 1996, on- and off-site releases declined by 3.8 percent, or 44.17 million kilograms. The decrease in air releases actually exceeded this amount (52.35 million kilograms), but

this drop was offset by increases in water, land and off-site releases. From 1988 to 1996, total 

on-site and off-site releases decreased 45.6 percent, or 680 million kilograms.

Changes in the TRI Program. Starting with the 1998 reporting year, seven new industry sectors begin reporting to TRI. The addition of these new industry sectors increases the comparability

between the TRI and the Canadian NPRI, which already collects PRTR data from these sectors.

Increasing comparability is one of the primary objectives of the CEC’s PRTR work. The new sectors are metal mining, coal mining, electricity generating facilities that combust coal and/or oil,

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C hazardous waste disposal and treatment facilities, solvent recovery services, chemical and allied products wholesale distributors, and

petroleum bulk plants and terminals.

In addition to facility expansion, EPA began the process of expanding the public’s access to information on certain toxic chemicals. Recognizing the growing concern with persistant and

bioaccumulative toxic chemicals (PBTs), EPA proposed lowering the reporting threshold for PBT
73

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: United States

chemicals, as well as adding certain PBT chemicals to the TRI list. Vice-president Albert Gore

has called on EPA to complete this work in time to enable public access to the PBT chemical data

to start with the 2000 reporting year.

Article 2(1)(c) Environmental Education

NOAA has sought to increase public awareness and understanding of its programs over the past

year. For example, significant improvements were made to the Office of Protected Resources 

web site. Updated information on the ecology and status of protected marine species, and 

NMFS documents and publications for public use are now available on the web site at

<http://www.nmfs.gov/prot_res>. In addition, NMFS, in conjunction with the National Ocean

Service (NOS) and the National Aquarium, developed an educational CD-ROM, Marine Mammals

Ashore, to increase communication and the effectiveness of marine mammal stranding response

within the United States and internationally. This information provides scientists, conservationists and managers with a wealth of knowledge about life history, ecology, and threats to marine

mammal species. Finally, in response to the public’s increased interest in viewing marine wildlife,

NMFS and NOS have joined the National Watchable Wildlife Program to increase public awareness of safe, respectful methods of watching marine wildlife. To this end, NMFS and NOS are

collaborating in the development of educational and outreach materials about viewing marine

mammals and sea turtles without disturbing them. 

Year of the Ocean. In recognition of the importance of the marine environment, the United

Nations declared 1998 the International Year of the Ocean (YOTO). This designation provided

individual organizations and governments with an important opportunity to raise public awareness and understanding of the ocean and related issues. NOAA, as one of an informal group of

federal agencies with ocean interests, developed a number of activities in recognition of YOTO.

Among these activities was the development of a variety of materials to help teachers incorporate

ocean-related information and issues into their classroom activities. These materials include a

poster portraying an artistic interpretation of more than 70 ocean-dwelling organisms, with a

companion Educator’s Guide which discusses these species, as well as a series of 14 fact sheets

on major ocean issues, and a web site (<http://www.yoto98.noaa.gov>), with information and

activities to make learning about the ocean fun.

National Ocean Conference. As part of the Year of the Ocean activities, the Department 

of Commerce and the Department of the Navy co-hosted the National Ocean Conference on

11–12 June 1998, in Monterey, California. The purpose of the conference was to highlight the

important role the oceans play in our daily lives and to raise awareness of ocean issues among the

public and all the key stakeholders. The conference focused on the sustainable use of coastal and

ocean resources, including the marine transportation system, coastal habitat, fishing stocks, and

the interaction of ocean processes on weather and climate.

CD-ROMs. As part of its State of the Coast Report, NOAA has produced two multimedia educational CD-ROMs, which complement the State of the Coast web site, and were designed for

schools and museums. Our Crowded Shores, Balancing Growth and Resource Protection includes 90 minutes of interactive audio, video, animation, and photo mosaics, on the topics of coastal population

and development and their impact on coastal environments. An expanded treatment of these 
74

topics is included in the enhanced version of another State of the Coast CD-ROM, Turning the

Tide, America’s Coasts at a Crossroads, which also includes sections on marine commerce and navigation, estuaries and pollution, and marine sanctuaries and reserves.

Article 2(1)(d) Scientific Research and Technology Development

On 30 November 1998, EPA announced final health effects testing requirements for conventional

and oxygenated gasoline under Clean Air Act fuel and fuel additive health effects testing regulations. The testing requirements are designed to generate data concerning the potential health

effects of conventional gasoline and of oxygenate compounds such as methyl tertiary butyl ether

(MTBE). Manufacturers of baseline gasoline and MTBE are required to conduct the full battery

of health effects tests specified in Chapter 40, section 79.53 of the Code of Federal Regulations,

as well as: (1) additional neurotoxicity assessments; (2) a two-generation reproductive study; (3)

a two-species developmental study; (4) a two-year carcinogenicity study; (5) a screening panel for

immunological effects; and (6) studies to screen population exposure. Additional health effects

testing requirements beyond those specified in Chapter 40, section 79.53 of the Code of Federal

Regulations are also required for the oxygenate compounds ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE),

ethanol, tertiary amyl methyl ether (TAME), diisopropyl ether (DIPE), and tertiary butyl alcohol

(TBA). Although EPA was not required to promulgate these additional testing requirements through

a rule-making, the Agency provided a 120-day public comment and review period, and responded

to the public comments in developing the final testing requirements.

The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) specified a number of risk and safety factors

that must be considered before a pesticide tolerance level can be approved or maintained. The

FQPA also linked the legal standard for granting and maintaining pesticide tolerances (“reasonable certainty of no harm”) to the legal standard for registration of pesticide products for use on

foods. EPA and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) formed the Tolerance Reassessment

Advisory Committee (TRAC) to provide advice on how to conduct risk assessments under the

FQPA standard. The principal focus of TRAC’s deliberations has been on the risk assessments

performed by EPA using the FQPA standard for the organophosphate pesticides. Other important activities in 1998 under the FQPA include the publication of preliminary risk assessments

for 16 organophosphate pesticides and the development of a screening program to identify pesticides that might be endocrine disrupters.

US National Biological Information Infrastructure. The US continues to meets its obligations

under Article 2 of the Agreement through the development and expansion of the US National

Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII) as an Internet-accessible source of information on

biological resources and biological resources issues. 

NBII, at <www.nbii.gov>, is a distributed federation of biological data, information products,

and analytical tools and applications from a wide range of sources, including public and private

agencies and organizations, academic institutions, natural history collections and herbaria, etc. In

addition to increasing access to this wide range of data and information on the environment, the

NBII program also promotes the collaborative development of necessary standards and protocols

that assist in the discovery, retrieval, integration, and application of environmental data and 
75

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: United States

information. This includes the development of a biological metadata content standard (through

the US Federal Geographic Data Committee) and the continued development of the Integrated

Taxonomic Information System (ITIS). 

ITIS is an Internet-accessible (<www.itis.usda.gov>), scientifically credible database of the scientific names, synonyms, general distribution and origins of North American plant and animal

species. Development of ITIS is a key component of the US NBII effort because ITIS allows for

discovery, integration, and exchange of biological data from two or more different sources, even

when different scientific names have been used for the same species. Several US Federal agencies

collaborate with biological scientists at other institutions around the world to develop and maintain the ITIS system. The Government of Canada (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada) is also an

active partner in the development and enhancement of ITIS. Development of NBII and of ITIS

helps further environmental science research and technology development and promotes education and public understanding of environmental issues.

Article 2(1)(e) Environmental Impacts

On 29 October 1998, EPA issued a new policy and procedures for voluntary preparation of

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents, which replaced its 1974 Voluntary

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Policy. The new policy expands the scope of EPA’ s voluntary NEPA compliance by identifying specific factors, which may arise under any EPA program,

where preparation of a voluntary NEPA document can aid informed decision-making. These factors include EPA actions that involve other US federal agencies, cross-media issues, broad

ecosystems, cumulative impacts, and other concerns such as environmental justice.

Article 3 

Levels of Protection

Clean Air. EPA promulgated three final rules on 11 September 1998 establishing volatile organic

compound (VOC) content limits for automobile refinish coatings, consumer products and architectural coatings. EPA’s earlier determination that VOCs from these sources have the potential to

contribute to ozone levels that violate the National Ambient Air Quality Standards was the basis

for formulating these final rules. EPA estimates that these rules will reduce VOC emissions by

213,500 metric tons per year from the 1990 baseline.

A final rule issued by EPA on 16 September 1998 reduces nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions limits for electric utility steam-generating units, both new and modified or reconstructed, and

industrial-commercial-institutional steam-generating units that combust fossil fuels. In contrast

to prior rules applicable to such sources, the final prescribes the same emissions limits for all units

regardless of the type of fuel being used. With respect to the new electric utility units, the rule

also changes the NOx emissions limit to an output-based format to promote energy efficiency and

pollution prevention.
76

All automobile manufacturers selling vehicles in the United States agreed to be bound by voluntary tailpipe standards for cars and light-duty trucks that are more stringent than those that could

otherwise be required. The manufacturers agreed to the voluntary standards under a new clean

car program called the National Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program. The finalized national LEV

regulations were published on 7 January 1998.

Cross-Media Protection. The EPA Administrator signed a notice on 13 March 1998 announcing

EPA’s determinations that the provisions of section 112 of the Clean Air Act provide adequate legal

authority to prevent serious adverse effects to public health and serious or widespread environmental

effects associated with atmospheric deposition of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) to the Great Lakes,

Lake Champlain, Chesapeake Bay, and coastal waters. The determinations do not reach the conclusion that no further development of the toxic air pollutants program is needed, and in fact state

that continued development of the broader section 112 program is necessary. The report also does

not assess the success of EPA’s existing regulatory programs in achieving protection of the environment from atmospheric HAP deposition. It does assess the legal authorities that can be utilized under

section 112 to prevent adverse effects from the deposition of toxic air pollutants.

EPA promulgated a pharmaceuticals regulation under the National Emissions Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) on 21 September that, in conjunction with Clean Water Act

regulations issued that same day, is intended to address emissions of methylene chloride, methanol,

toluene, and hydrogen chloride. The air rule is projected to reduce HAP emissions from existing

facilities by 21,800 metric tons per year. It will also reduce VOC emissions.

Clean Water. In 1998, the US Department of Agriculture and EPA proposed a Unified National

Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations. EPA also announced that revision of existing effluent

guidelines for beef, dairy, poultry and swine operations is a long-term item on its unified agenda.

Both of these actions are consistent with the Clean Water Initiative announced by Vice-president

Gore in October 1997 that undertakes to strengthen water pollution control under the Clean

Water Act.

In July 1998, EPA made available its long-range plan on the development of water quality criteria and standards. Under the plan, seven areas will receive priority attention: nutrient criteria;

criteria for microbial pathogens; development of biocriteria; strengthening existing ambient criteria for water and sediments; evaluating possible criteria for excessive sedimentation, flow

alterations and wildlife; improving water quality monitoring tools; and improving partnerships

with states and tribes to ensure implementation of water quality criteria and standards. Similarly,

in September 1998, EPA issued notice of its plan for developing new or revised effluent guidelines. Among other aspects of the plan, the Agency intends to continue to develop effluent guidelines

for direct and indirect discharges to water from the following industries: pulp, paper and 

paperboard; centralized waste treatment; metal products and machinery; landfills; industrial waste

combustors; industrial laundries; transportation equipment cleaning; iron and steel manufacturing; oil and gas extraction; coal mining; and feedlots.
77

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: United States

Hazardous Waste. EPA completed the mammoth task of prohibiting the land disposal of all hazardous wastes that do not thereby meet the treatment standards established by EPA. These standards

are based on the performance achieved using the Best Demonstrated Available Technology and

assure that threats posed to human health and to the environment from the land disposal of the

wastes are minimized. In rules promulgated on 26 May 1998, EPA prohibited the land disposal

of hazardous wastes from mineral processing and of all wastes whose metal content renders them

toxic, and established treatment standards for these substances. In the same notice, EPA also

established alternative treatment standards for contaminated soils, which allow soils to be treated

by technologies other than combustion. The purpose of these standards is to encourage soil remediation by providing achievable treatment alternatives that are technically and environmentally

appropriate for contaminated soils. In addition, new standards were announced by EPA on 22

October 1998 that enable it and US states operating under the authorization of the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act to use a variety of authorities to impose requirements on land

disposal units that are in need of post-closure care but are not subject to a permit.

Stratospheric Ozone Protection. A 5 March 1998 final rule issued by EPA bans the manufacture in the US of halon-blend chemicals; prohibits the intentional release of halons during testing,

repair and disposal of halon-containing equipment; requires appropriate training of technicians

with regard to halon emissions reduction; bans disposal of equipment containing halons except

by sending the equipment for halon recovery; and bans the disposal of halons except by recycling

or other approved methods.

National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act in 1998. The Department of the Interior

(DOI) and Congress worked together in a bipartisan effort to implement the Act during 1998.

This landmark legislation provided a clear “wildlife first” mission to ensure that the 516 refuges

over 37 million hectares are managed as a national system of related lands, waters, and parties

with interest in the protection and conservation of the nation’s wildlife resources.

Endangered Species Act. The Department of the Interior continued to aggressively implement

a more effective Act during 1998 by strengthening partnership activities with other public agencies and private interests; by expanding the involvement of private landowners in habitat restoration

and species recovery; by using candidate conservation agreements to keep species off the threatened and endangered list; by developing Habitat Conservation Plans to allow economic development

to proceed while protecting species on private lands; and by implementing multispecies recovery

plans. Proof that the Act is working came on 6 May 1998, when the Secretary of Interior proposed that 29 species (or segments of species) be removed from the list or reclassified from

endangered status over the next two years. Twenty-one of these delistings/reclassifications, including the American peregrine falcon, the bald eagle, the Columbia white-tailed deer, and the gray

wolf, are due to successful recovery efforts implemented under the Act.

Restoring Ecosystems. Over the last five years, the US Administration has implemented three

large-scale restoration efforts using new methods, partnerships and renewed public participation.

There has been continued progress this past year in restoring three priority watersheds: California’s
78

Bay-Delta, the largest estuary on the west coast of North America; the Florida Everglades, whose

natural water flows are being restored; and the forests of the Pacific Northwest, where trout and

coho, chinook and sockeye salmon are being replenished. All these areas will require continued

rehabilitation in order to protect their vitality for future generations.

Creation of Grand Staircase–Escalante National Monument. The DOI Bureau of Land

Management released the Draft Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement for

the Grand Staircase–Escalante National Monument in November 1998. The Monument was

established on 18 September 1996, when President Clinton issued a Proclamation under the

Antiquities Act of 1906. The Monument was created to protect an array of scientific, historic,

biological, geological, paleontological, and archaeological objects in south-central Utah. The

proclamation received a great deal of national attention. Public meetings on the draft plan were

held throughout the West and in Washington DC, and nearly 7,000 comments on the plan have

been received to date.

Protection and Sustainable Use of Living Marine Resources. NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS) is dedicated to the management and conservation of commercial and recreational

ocean fisheries. It also works to protect and recover protected marine species, including marine

mammals and endangered species. Under the recently reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act, fishery management plans developed by Regional Fishery

Management Councils are being implemented to prevent overfishing. Almost all of the 39 fishery management plans have been amended to include more conservative overfishing definitions,

measures to prevent overfishing and rebuild overfished stocks, and measures to minimize bycatch

and adverse effects on fish habitat. In 1998, the status of 119 fish stocks were assessed and 180

fishery management actions were completed. NMFS also completed stock assessments for 114

marine mammal stocks and developed recovery plans for threatened and endangered species of

sea turtles, whales and sturgeon.

Also in 1998, the United States demonstrated international leadership, through the forum of the

United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, by successfully negotiating agreements with

the world’s fishing nations to address excess fishing fleet capacity and improve the conservation

of sharks and seabirds. The United States also succeeded in establishing the first-ever mandatory

plan to rebuild overfished Western Atlantic bluefin tuna stocks, via the International Commission

for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas.

Oil Spill Response and Damage Assessment. In conjunction with the US Coast Guard and other

federal and state agencies, NOAA responded to over 92 spills of hazardous materials and to numerous groundings of vessels. Part of NOAA’s role in hazardous materials response involves assessing

the damage incurred from these accidents and identifying liable parties. To this end, NOAA released

a draft Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan for the North Cape oil spill, which released 3.13

million liters of heating oil off Rhode Island in January 1996. NOAA also helped California obtain

a US$8 million settlement from the party responsible for the SS Cape Mohican oil spill in 1996

and a settlement from Unocal Corporation for a prolonged oil pipeline leak. That leak lasted from

the 1950s until 1994, and released between 32 and 45 million liters along the central CA coast.

Unocal has agreed to pay US$43.8 million in addition to cleanup costs.
79

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: United States

Article 4

Publication

Pesticides Registration. As a consequence of its perception that the “treated article” exemption to pesticides registration under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)

has been abused, EPA put forth its current interpretation of that exemption in a Federal Register

notice published on 17 April 1998. The notice also included, for public review and comment, a

draft pesticide registration notice that would, if adopted, further limit the exemption. 

Article 5 

Government Enforcement Action

In 1998, EPA expanded its efforts to give industry additional incentives to voluntarily disclose and

correct its violations, and to give small businesses the information and assistance they need to

maintain compliance with the law. This three-prong approach—enforcement, compliance incentives, and compliance assistance—is reaping great dividends in terms of protecting the public and

the environment. 

Maintaining the momentum from last year’s record level of enforcement, EPA referred 677 criminal and civil cases to the US Department of Justice, with over US$180 million assessed in penalties

and fines—the second highest combined totals in EPA’s history. Perhaps more importantly, the

data collected by EPA indicates that the enforcement actions settled in FY 1998 have contributed

to the reduction of 2.27 million kilograms of ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), 3.18

million kilograms of asbestos, 85.27 million kilograms of carbon monoxide, and 10.7 million

kilograms of nitrogen oxide from the environment.

Helping businesses and communities all across the United States comply with environmental

requirements, EPA offered an extensive set of compliance assistance tools that include “plain

English” guides to environmental requirements, translations of requirements into several languages, sector notebooks, and national Compliance Assistance Centers.

Most federal environmental statutes authorize EPA to delegate to states the primary responsibility for implementing and enforcing national environmental programs. Tribal governments can also

receive primary authority for managing environmental programs. Working through the National

Environmental Performance Partnership System and organizations of state officials such as the

National Association of Attorneys General and the Environment Council of the States, EPA is

increasing the effectiveness of the federal-state partnership in meeting national and state environmental goals and objectives. 

At the national level of government, the trend towards results-based management and greater

accountability to the taxpayers is being realized through implementation of the Government

Performance and Results Act (GPRA). EPA’s National Performance Measures Strategy (NPMS) is

a pioneering effort to identify, design, implement, and use meaningful performance measures to

assess the effectiveness of our national enforcement and compliance assurance program. The NPMS

will help EPA, states and the public determine which tools and strategies are working best and

examine whether or not the regulated community is meeting its responsibilities under the law.
80

Article 5(1)(b) Monitoring for Compliance, Including Inspections

In 1998, EPA’s regional staff conducted 23,237 inspections under the various environmental

statutes, a 19 percent increase over 1997 levels.

EPA has enhanced its targeting approaches by using a broad array of environmental quality information, demographics, and information from the results of its compliance monitoring activities.

In targeting compliance and enforcement efforts, EPA takes into account sector-based environmental problems or compliance patterns, statute-specific compliance problems, and an analysis

of compliance/enforcement history and pollutant releases.

Current national sector priorities include the dry-cleaning industry, refining of primary nonferrous metals, and petroleum refining. EPA is also focusing on several other significant sectors,

such as municipalities (particularly their combined sewer overflows, sanitary sewer overflows,

and storm water overflows and municipal solid waste combustors), industrial organic-chemical

manufacturing and chemical preparations sectors (because they have high TRI releases), the iron

and steel industry, coal-fired power plants, and automotive repair shops.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible for enforcing US and international laws, regulations, and treaties that protect wildlife resources. To accomplish its task, the Service works closely

with state, tribal, and international wildlife enforcement agencies. Its special agents in the field 

typically pursue more than 11,000 investigative cases each year. Activities include infiltrating sophisticated smuggling rings, conducting surveillance operations during waterfowl hunting seasons, and

breaking up commercial poaching operations that target native wildlife. Agents also investigate

crimes that threaten species reintroduction programs and critical wildlife habitat, safeguard wildlife

on refuges, national parks, and other public lands, and protect migratory birds and other animals

from such manmade environmental hazards as oil pits, electric power lines, and pesticides. 

The Service’s wildlife inspectors are a uniformed force of professional import/export control officers who monitor US wildlife trade at the nation’s major ports of entry. Inspectors not only regulate

a billion-dollar-a-year industry, they are also the country’s front-line defense against illegal wildlife

trafficking. They ensure that wildlife imports and exports comply with US and international and

treaties, stop illegal shipments, intercept smuggled wildlife and wildlife products, and work with

the US Customs Service to regulate international passenger traffic.

Also, the Endangered Species Act and the Lacy Act provide for the staffing of ports of entry with

wildlife inspectors to monitor wildlife shipments and the licensing of commercial wildlife importers

and exporters.

Articles 5(1)(c) Compliance Assistance and 5(1)(e) Enforcement Procedures

In 1998, approximately 250,000 regulated entities were contacted by EPA’s regional offices in an

outreach of compliance assistance based on sector and media priorities. The highest amount of

compliance assistance activities occurred through the distribution of compliance assistance tools,

which reached over 175,000 facilities.
81

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: United States

Within the seven sectors for which compliance assistance information is tracked, auto service and

repair facilities received the highest amount of assistance. Municipal officials attended the most

workshops, and both auto service/repair and dry cleaners received the most on-site visits.

Working in partnership with business and labor, EPA also created five new national Compliance

Assistance Centers, for a total of nine Centers that are “on line” and fully functioning. The new

EPA Centers are for the paints and coatings industries, small- and medium-sized chemical manufacturing, transportation, and printed wiring board industries, as well as a Center addressing the

concerns of local governments. Many users visiting the Centers’ web sites are taking action as a

result of their Center visits. Over 80 percent of users responding to a survey indicated that they

have taken steps to improve compliance, such as by requesting technical assistance, contacting a

regulatory agency, changing a process, or changing the handling of a waste or emission.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service promotes compliance domestically and internationally through

public outreach, education, and participation in exchanges of information in international workshops such as the Marine Invertebrate Workshop in November 1998.

Article 5(1)(d) Public Access to Noncompliance Information

Public access to data allows communities to monitor environmental conditions and compliance

records of nearby facilities and provides an additional incentive for businesses to be in compliance with environmental laws. EPA believes that technology is now making computer records the

most important way to track facility information, and is gradually replacing the hard-copy file

approach to managing records. EPA’s web site currently contains about 4,200 enforcement and

compliance-related documents—and EPA expects to triple that number by the end of FY 1999. 

Last year, EPA opened the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center (ECDIC),

a library system containing EPA’s enforcement and compliance assurance regulations, policy and

guidance, and related documents. The Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) system

provides interested members of the public with access to more than ten EPA databases. Many

businesses are starting to use this system to monitor their own environmental performance. In

addition, EPA’s Enhanced Public Access Task Project will make all of the Agency’s significant guidance and policies electronically accessible to regions, states, industry and the public by the end

of FY 2000. 

In 1998, EPA launched the Sector Facility Indexing Project (SFIP), a pilot project that makes it

easier for the public to access a wide range of environmental information about regulated facilities. Under SFIP, EPA integrated publicly available information so that it can be viewed in one

place, and can be used to better understand overall facility environmental records. SFIP profiles

approximately 650 individual facilities in five industrial sectors: automobile assembly; pulp manufacturing; petroleum refining; iron and steel production; and the primary smelting and refining

of aluminum, copper, lead, and zinc (nonferrous metals). For each facility, SFIP includes information on compliance and inspection history, chemical releases and spills, demographics of the

surrounding population, and production.
82

Article 5(1)(f) Promotion of Environmental Audits 

EPA’s audit policy encourages all companies to self-police by giving them real economic incentives to self-monitor, disclose, and correct environmental violations. Under the policy, EPA

eliminates or reduces civil penalties for companies that detect violations through an environmental

audit or compliance management program, voluntarily disclose the violations to EPA, and take

prompt action to correct them. Similarly, under the audit policy, EPA will not recommend criminal prosecution of companies that voluntarily disclose criminal violations and that satisfy the

criteria outlined in the policy. EPA will, however, pursue prosecution of culpable individuals.

Importantly, the policy encourages self-policing in a fair manner without tolerating secrecy, providing blanket immunities, or excusing criminal conduct. 

Since the inception of the audit policy, a total of 450 companies have disclosed violations at 1,870

facilities, and the Agency has granted relief to 164 companies at 540 facilities. The rates of disclosing companies and corrected violations have increased every year since the policy became

effective. In 1998, at least 200 companies disclosed violations at 950 facilities under the auspices

of the Agency’s self-disclosure (audit) policy.

In November 1998, EPA and the National Pork Producers Council entered into a voluntary compliance program to reduce runoff of animal wastes from pork-producing operations. Polluted runoff

from industrial feeding operations is a leading source of water pollution, associated with such threats

to public health and the environment as Pfiesteria outbreaks and other problems. Under this initiative, participating pork producers will have their operations (as many as 10,000 facilities) voluntarily

assessed for Clean Water Act violations by certified independent inspectors. Producers who promptly

disclose and correct any discovered violations from these audits will receive a much smaller civil

penalty than they might otherwise incur under the law. In implementing this program, EPA will

consult closely with the states, which may administer the program directly.

EPA initiated a program under the Toxic Substances Control Act to encourage chemical companies to voluntarily audit their records and submit all relevant data. Under this program, a company’s

liability would be capped at US$1 million if the company conducted audits, identified violations,

and submitted required substantial risk data within a certain deadline. As a result, 123 companies undertook environmental audits, and EPA received over 11,000 previously unreported studies

or reports on chemicals that may cause health or environmental harm. EPA collected over 

US$22.7 million in penalties.

Articles 5(1)(j), 5(2) and 5(3) Judicial, Quasi-Judicial or Administrative Proceedings to Seek

Appropriate Sanctions or Remedies

Since 1974, EPA has assessed fines and penalties amounting to over US$1.5 billion dollars. In 1998,

the Clean Air Act was responsible for 53 percent of criminal penalties (US$49 million) and 44 percent of civil judicial penalties (US$28 million). The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

garnered the most administrative penalties (20 percent), at US$5.5 million. Clean Water Act 

settlements were responsible for the highest amounts of injunctive relief (US$860 million, 

or 43 percent of the total) and Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) value (US$42 million,

or 46 percent of the total).
83

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: United States

Data collected by EPA indicates that the enforcement actions settled in 1998 had an extremely

positive impact on the protection of human health and the environment. Many violators, as part

of their settlement of enforcement actions, are agreeing to carry out environmentally beneficial

SEPs they would not otherwise be required to perform. As a result of EPA enforcement, polluters

spent a total of just over US$2 billion to correct violations, take additional steps to protect the

environment, and clean up Superfund sites—more than US$200 million dollars over what was

spent the previous year.

The 1998 settlement with seven heavy-duty diesel engine manufacturers who were part of the

largest Clean Air Act (CAA) enforcement action in history is expected to prevent 68 million metric tons of NOx air pollution over the next 27 years and reduce the total NOx emissions from diesel

engines by one-third as of the year 2003. EPA estimates that these companies, comprising 95 percent of the US heavy-duty diesel engine market, will spend collectively more than US$850 million

to introduce cleaner new engines, rebuild older engines to cleaner levels, recall pickup trucks that

have defeat devices installed, and conduct new emissions testing. The companies will also undertake a number of projects to lower NOx emissions, including research and development projects

to design low-emitting engines that use new technologies and cleaner fuels.

Also in 1998, the Fish and Wildlife Service filed charges in over 6,000 criminal cases and assessed

fines totaling over US$2,000,000 and penalties totaling over 30 years in jail.

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES).

The US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service rely on the Endangered

Species Act (ESA) and the Lacey Act as the primary domestic legislation to control wildlife imports

and exports. CITES is the major international trade agreement for the control of trade in wildlife

and plants. CITES regulates, and in many cases prohibits, trade in imperiled species by categorizing species based on degrees of endangerment through the establishment of import/export

rules and permit procedures for each species category.

References

EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 

OECA Home Page http://www.epa.gov/oeca

Accomplishments and Priorities

OECA Accomplishments Reports, 1995–97 http://www.epa.gov/oeca/usepaoeca.html

FY 98/99 MOA Guidance (includes priorities) http://www.epa.gov/oeca/moa9899.pdf

FY 99 MOA Update (includes priorities) http://www.epa.gov/oeca/polguid/9899moaguide.pdf

Compliance Assistance

Inventory of Compliance Assistance Tools http://www.epa.gov/oeca/ccsmd/cac/contents

Compliance Assistance Centers Information http://www.epa.gov/oeca/mfcac.html

Sector Notebooks http://www.epa.gov/oeca/sector/
84

1 See, e.g., Dubois v. US Department of Agriculture, 20 F. Supp. 2d 263 (D.N.H. 1998)(dismissing remaining CWA citizen civil penalty

claim as moot after a prohibitory injunction has been issued, citing Laidlaw); NRDC v. Southwest Marine, 28 F. Supp. 2d 584

(S.D.Cal. 1998)(denying a motion to dismiss a remaining CWA citizen civil penalty claim as moot and distinguishing Laidlaw);

and, Woodlands Limited v. NationsBank, 1998 US LEXIS 23716 (4th Cir. 1998)(garnishment case citing Laidlaw).

Compliance Incentives

Small Communities Policy http://www.epa.gov/oeca/scpolicy.html

Small Business Policy http://www.epa.gov/oeca/smbusi.html

Audit Policy: Incentives for Self Policing http://www.epa.gov/oeca/auditpol.html

Supplemental Environmental Projects http://www.epa.gov/oeca/sep/ 

Measures and Information

National Performance Measures Strategy http://www.epa.gov/oeca/perfmeas/npmsfinal.

Integrated Data for Enforcement 

Analysis (IDEA) http://www.epa.gov/oeca/idea/about.html

Sector Facility Indexing Project http://www.epa.gov/oeca/sfi 

EPA Environmental and Spatial Data http://www.epa.gov/enviro/

National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration http://www.noaa.gov

US Fish and Wildlife Service http://www.fws.gov

Article 6 

Private Access to Remedies

Standing. In 1998, the Fourth Circuit held that the defendant in a Clean Water Act (CWA) citizen suit had the power, as a matter of Constitutional law, to moot a plaintiff ’s claims for civil

penalties by post-complaint compliance with the Act, even though the plaintiff had standing to

seek penalties and injunctive relief at the time it filed the citizen suit. In Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw

Environmental Services (TOC), Inc., 149 F. 3d 303 (4th Cir. 1998), the plaintiffs filed a petition for

a writ of certiorari, and on 1 March 1999, the US Supreme Court granted the petition. Affirmance

of the Fourth Circuit’s ruling would seriously harm citizen enforcement of a wide range of federal environmental laws. Indeed, in a number of recent suits, various defendants have already cited

the Laidlaw decision to support a motion to dismiss.1

In Steel Company v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 118 Sup. Ct. 1003 (1998), the Supreme Court

addressed citizen enforcement standing issues. There, the plaintiff sought penalties for violations

of reporting requirements under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act

but did not seek any injunctive relief, or allege any likelihood of continuing violations. The Supreme

Court determined that citizens lack standing to sue when the only relief requested at the time the

case was filed—civil penalties payable to the US Treasury—could not redress the injury the plaintiff had allegedly suffered. (Id. at 1019.) The Court ruled that a suit for civil penalties alone would

not establish standing because it would not redress the plaintiff ’s own injury, but merely would

vindicate generally the rule of law and the undifferentiated public interest. (Id. at 1018.) 
85

Annual Report 1998 } Country Reports: United States

The plaintiffs in Laidlaw met the Gwaltney2 standing test by alleging ongoing violations at the time

of the complaint. Although the district court ultimately found that violations had occurred and

assessed penalties, it declined to issue an injunction against future violations because it concluded

that Laidlaw’s violations had not harmed the environment and that Laidlaw was by then complying with its permit. The plaintiffs appealed only the penalty assessment to the Fourth Circuit.

Citing Steel, the Fourth Circuit found that the CWA citizen suit became entirely moot once the

defendant came into compliance, despite any unaddressed demand for civil penalties. The Fourth

Circuit ruled that because the only remedy left available to the plaintiffs—civil penalties payable

to the United States—would not redress their injuries, plaintiffs’ appeal was moot.

2 Gwaltney of Smithfield v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, 484 US 49 (1987).

1998

Financial 

Review

3
88

1998 Audited

Financial Statements

Table of Contents

Auditors’ Report 89

Balance Sheet 90

Statement of Revenue and Expenditures 91

Statement of Change in Capital 92

Statement of Changes in Financial Position 92

Notes to the Financial Statements 93–95

Schedule 96
89

Annual Report 1998 } 1998 Financial Review

Auditors’ Report

To the Council of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation

We have audited the balance sheet of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation as at 

December 31, 1998 and the statements of revenue and expenditures, change in capital and changes

in financial position for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of

the Commission’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial

statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform an audit to obtain reasonable assurance whether the

financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test

basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also

includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management,

as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.

In our opinion, these financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Commission as at December 31, 1998 and the results of its operations and the changes

in its financial position for the year then ended in accordance with generally accepted accounting

principles in Canada.

Chartered Accountants

March 26, 1999

Montreal, Québec
90

Balance Sheet

As at 31 December 1998 (in Canadian dollars) 1998 1997

$ $

Assets

Current assets

Cash and term deposits 2,568,774 3,117,027

Goods and services tax (Note 4) 1,960,018 1,430,112

Contributions receivable (Note 5) – 443,051

Other assets 180,808 200,935

4,709,600 5,191,125

Capital assets (Note 6) 389,190 569,661

5,098,790 5,760,786

Liabilities

Current liabilities

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities 740,305 1,030,878

Contributions refundable – 374,511

740,305 1,405,389

Deferred revenue 1,344,351 1,443,946

Deferred contributions (Note 7) 2,889,000 1,780,337

4,973,656 4,629,672

Capital

Invested in capital assets 389,190 569,661

Restricted for North American Fund

for Environmental Cooperation 1,272,517 1,362,614

Unrestricted (1,536,573) (801,161)

125,134 1,131,114

5,098,790 5,760,786

Commitments (Note 8)
91

Annual Report 1998 } 1998 Financial Review

Statement of Revenue and Expenditures

Year ended 31 December 1998 (in Canadian dollars) 1998 1997

$ $

Revenue

Contribution — Canada 4,500,000 4,125,000

Contribution — Mexico 4,136,000 4,125,000

Contribution — United States 4,500,000 4,125,000

Internally generated funds 1,147,543 929,709

Other revenue 194,038 193,208

14,477,581 13,497,917

Expenditures

Expenses related to work program — Schedule 2,330,207 2,219,116

Expenses related to specific obligations — Schedule 624,654 643,163

Expenses related to Council meetings — Schedule 321,810 146,169

Expenses related to Public consultation — Schedule 110,463 205,971

Expenses related to JPAC — Schedule 173,010 142,501

Expenses related to Directorate operations 159,756 186,941

Expenses related to North American Fund

for Environmental Cooperation 206,770 164,150

Expenditures related to contingency fund 180,953 63,921

CEC Resource Center 178,195 97,417

Publishing and web site 548,685 366,541

Public outreach 379,758 227,912

Salaries and fringe benefits

Program-related 3,799,630 3,410,748

Departmental operations 659,760 755,979

Relocation and orientation expenses 188,451 50,967

Training expenses 29,967 20,978

Office expenses 246,213 235,145

Telecommunications 132,350 166,228

Systems support 83,668 81,817

Rent, utilities and office maintenance 431,485 475,915

Administrative fees 204,567 93,725

Gain on foreign exchange (22,179) (112,371)

10,968,173 9,642,933

Excess of revenue over expenditures 3,509,408 3,854,984

Contributions adjustment (483,522) –

Contributions transferred to the following

year budget (Notes 3(a) and 7) (2,889,000) (1,780,337)

Contributions from prior year 1,780,337 2,800,920

Expenditures related to prior year commitments — Schedule (1,607,000) (3,404,349)

Contributions refundable 374,511 (374,511)

Excess of revenue over expenditures before the following items 684,734 1,096,707

Amortization of capital assets 239,742 280,546

Loss on disposal of capital assets 60,875 –

Grants disbursed 1,390,097 2,235,626

Excess of expenditures over revenue (1,005,980) (1,419,465)
92

Statement of Change in Capital

Year ended 31 December 1998 (in Canadian dollars)

Restricted for

North American

Invested Fund for

in capital Environmental Total Total

assets Cooperation Unrestricted 1998 1997

$ $$$ $

Balance, beginning of year 569,661 1,362,614 (801,161) 1,131,114 2,550,579

Excess (deficiency)

of revenue over expenditures (300,617) (1,390,097) 684,734 (1,005,980) (1,419,465)

Transfer – 1,300,000 (1,300,000) – –

Investment in capital assets 120,146 – (120,146) – –

Balance, end of year 389,190 1,272,517 (1,536,573) 125,134 1,131,114

Statement of Changes in Financial Position

Year ended 31 December 1998 (in Canadian dollars) 1998 1997

$ $

Operating activities

Excess of expenditures over revenue (1,005,980) (1,419,465)

Items not affecting cash

Amortization of capital assets 239,742 280,546

Loss on disposal of capital assets 60,875 –

Contributions transferred to the following year budget 2,889,000 1,780,337

Contributions from prior year (1,780,337) (2,800,920)

403,300 (2,159,502)

Changes in non-cash operating working capital items (731,812) (38,410)

(328,512) (2,197,912)

Financing activities

Change in deferred revenue (99,595) 364,773

Investing activities

Acquisition of capital assets (128,796) (127,787)

Disposal of capital assets 8,650 –

(120,146) (127,787)

Net cash outflow (548,253) (1,960,926)

Cash position, beginning of year 3,117,027 5,077,953

Cash position, end of year 2,568,774 3,117,027
93

Annual Report 1998 } 1998 Financial Review

Notes to the Financial Statements

Year ended 31 December 1998 (in Canadian dollars)

1. Nature of activities

The Commission for Environmental Cooperation is an international organization that was created by the

North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation for the purpose of meeting NAFTA’s environmental provisions. The Commission became operational in July 1994.

2. Change of accounting policy

During the year, the Commission for Environmental Cooperation adopted the new recommendations of

the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants for not-for-profit organizations. This change was accounted

for retroactively and the comparative figures for the prior year were modified accordingly. The balance

sheet now presents capital separately invested in capital assets, restricted for the North American Fund

for Environmental Cooperation and unrestricted.

3. Significant accounting policies

The financial statements are presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles including the following significant accounting policies.

(a) Contributions

The Government of Canada, the Government of the United Mexican States and the Government of the

United States of America (the Parties) contribute to the Commission’s annual budget by mutual agreement.

Funds contributed remain available for six months following the end of the financial year to discharge

related obligations incurred during the year.

Any surplus funds in excess of 5% of the budget are credited to the Parties by an adjustment of the

assessments for the subsequent financial year.

(b) Capital assets

Capital assets are recorded at cost and are being amortized on a straight-line basis at the following annual

rates:

Computer equipment 20%

Computer equipment and software — projects 30%

Computer software 30%

Furniture and fixtures 20%

Telephone system 30%

Equipment 30%

Leasehold improvements 12%

(c) Foreign currencies

Transactions conducted in foreign currencies are translated using the temporal method. Exchange gains

and losses are included in the results for the period.

(d) Deferred revenue

Deferred revenue represents leasehold inducements relating to office space. These inducements, which

are amortized over the term of the lease, are offset against rental expenses.
94

4. Goods and Services Tax

These receivables relate to QST, GST and HST receivable. Given the international status of the Commission,

special agreements must be signed between the Federal and Quebec governments and the Commission

before the goods and services taxes paid on purchases are reimbursed. An agreement with the Federal

government was signed in June 1997 and published in the Canada Gazette on 23 September 1997, establishing the right to reimbursement of GST and HST taxes from September 1997 forward. A Remission

Order will be required for reimbursement of GST and HST taxes paid prior to this date. As at the auditors’ report date, the Remission Order has not been processed. Also, no agreement has yet been signed

between the Commission and the Quebec government regarding QST. Management is of the opinion that

this amount will be received.

5. Contributions receivable

1998 1997

$ $

Mexico – 443,051

6. Capital assets

1998 1997

Accumulated Net Book Net Book

Cost Amortization Value Value

$$$ $

Computer equipment 252,222 91,000 161,222 243,010

Computer equipment and

software — projects 127,602 85,477 42,125 69,654

Computer software 90,993 62,242 28,751 43,350

Furniture and fixtures 367,030 296,748 70,282 138,274

Telephone system 118,005 96,021 21,984 16,066

Equipment 140,425 125,718 14,707 6,841

Leasehold improvements 68,769 18,650 50,119 52,466

1,165,046 775,856 389,190 569,661

7. Deferred contributions

For the 1998 financial year, contributions available to discharge related obligations during 1999 amount

to $2,889,000 (1997 — $1,780,337). These contributions are presented as deferred contributions in

the balance sheet.

Notes to the Financial Statements

Year ended 31 December 1998 (in Canadian dollars)
95

Annual Report 1998 } 1998 Financial Review

Notes to the Financial Statements

Year ended 31 December 1998 (in Canadian dollars)

8. Commitments

a) The Commission leases premises under an operating lease which expires in November 2004. 

Total minimum payments required in future years, are as follows:

$

1999 371,220

2000 417,817

2001 464,413

2002 511,009

2003 557,606

2004 497,030

2,819,095

The Commission has the option to cancel the lease upon payment of a penalty that ranges from $848,000

to $244,000 over the years 1999 to 2003.

b) The Commission has commitments of $2,889,000 relating to environmental projects as at 

31 December 1998.

c) The Commission has commitments for equipment and furniture leases which expire on or before

January 2002. Total payments required in future years are as follows:

$

1999 118,839

2000 103,355

2001 92,055

2002 13,614

327,863

9. Prior year figures

Certain of the prior year’s figures have been reclassified to conform to the current year’s presentation.

10. Uncertainty due to the Year 2000 Issue

The Year 2000 Issue arises because many computerized systems use two digits rather than four to identify a year. Date-sensitive systems may recognize the year 2000 as 1900 or some other date, resulting in

errors when information using year 2000 dates is processed. In addition, similar problems may arise in

some systems which use certain dates in 1999 to represent something other than a date. The effects of

the Year 2000 Issue may be experienced before, on, or after 1 January 2000, and, if not addressed, the

impact on operations and financial reporting may range from minor errors to significant systems failure

which could affect an entity’s ability to conduct normal business operations. It is not possible to be certain that all aspects of the Year 2000 Issue affecting the Commission, including those related to the efforts

of third parties, will be fully resolved.
96

Schedule

Expenses Related to the Work Program, Specific Obligations under North American Agreement, Council Meetings, Public

Consultation, Joint Public Advisory Committee (JPAC) Meetings, and Prior Year Commitments

Year ended 31 December 1998 (in Canadian dollars) 1998 1997

$ $

Work program

Travel, accommodation and meeting expenses 854,878 717,730

Professional fees 1,088,525 1,153,213

Translation and interpretation 255,164 183,493

Office expenses 131,640 164,680

2,330,207 2,219,116

Specific obligations under North American Agreement on 

Environmental Cooperation

Travel, accommodation and meeting expenses 154,024 203,639

Professional fees 344,070 344,805

Translation and interpretation 85,940 63,677

Office expenses 40,620 31,042

624,654 643,163

Council meetings

Travel, accommodation and meeting expenses 139,777 50,336

Translation and interpretation 128,767 78,715

Office expenses 27,138 17,118

Professional fees 26,128 –

321,810 146,169

Public consultation

Travel, accommodation and meeting expenses 96,414 76,763

Professional fees 9,420 35,068

Translation and interpretation 4,629 52,214

Office expenses – 41,926

110,463 205,971

Joint Public Advisory Committee (JPAC) meetings

Travel, accommodation and meeting expenses 105,627 107,287

Translation and interpretation 30,053 28,618

Professional fees 31,137 –

Office expenses 6,193 6,596

173,010 142,501

Expenditures related to prior year commitments

Expenditures related to project commitments

Travel, accommodation and meeting expenses 99,830 288,290

Professional fees 988,850 2,349,645

Publications and communications 6,597 157,280

Translation and interpretation 66,560 163,724

Program funding – 140,000

Office expenses 6,525 11,895

1,168,362 3,110,834

Expenditures not related to project commitments 438,638 293,515

1,607,000 3,404,349
Looking Ahead

4

99

Annual Report 1998 } Looking Ahead

Program

This item includes:

• project costs, salaries, and specific obligations* under NAAEC; 

• costs of Council Sessions, JPAC meetings and public meetings; 

• salaries of staff whose activity relates directly to Council and JPAC and Executive Management;

• publications and editorial support;

• NAFEC—funds for grants of up to C$100,000 and funds for projects not exceeding C$10,000;

and

• a portion of rent and telecommunications (85 percent of the total amount of each of these two).

* Includes the CEC Information Center, which, in addition to its initial responsibilities, is in charge of the maintenance and updating

of our home page, as well as that of the databases developed in our first years of operation.

Administration and Support

These items support the Commission as a whole and include Administration and Accounting,

Public Outreach, the remaining part of rent and telecommunications costs (15 percent), external

and temporary support, relocation expenses for staff, professional development costs, office equipment and supplies, and assets that include the payments for ongoing equipment leases.

Contingency Fund

Set aside for unforeseen costs.

1999 Annual

Program 

and Budget

Overview
100

1999 Project Budget Summary

I – E n v i r o n m e n t , E c o n o m y a n d T r a d e 

Projects Budget (US $)

99.01.01 Emerging Trends in North America $66,000

99.01.02 NAFTA Environmental Effects $140,000

99.01.03 Sustainable Use of Primary Natural Resources: Agriculture $85,000

99.01.04 Facilitating Conservation of Biodiversity as it relates to 

Trade in Wildlife Species $80,000

99.01.05 Sustainable Tourism in Natural Areas $110,000

I I – C o n s e r v a t i o n o f B i o d i v e r s i t y 

99.02.01 Strategic Directions for the Conservation of Biodiversity $100,000

99.02.02 Cooperation on the Protection of Marine and Coastal Ecosystems $190,000

99.02.03 Mapping Marine and Estuarine Ecosystems of North America $10,000

99.02.04 North American Marine Protected Areas Network $60,000

99.02.05 North American Biodiversity Conservation Mechanisms $240,000

99.02.06 North American Biodiversity Information Network $75,000

I I I – P o l l u t a n t s a n d H e a l t h

99.03.01 Facilitating Trinational Coordination in Air Quality Management $136,000

99.03.02 Developing Technical and Strategic Tools for 

Improved Air Quality in North America $255,000

99.03.03 Environmental Cooperation in the NAFTA Transportation Corridors $20,000

99.03.04 Regional Cooperation Toward Improved Understanding 

and Eventual Implementation of the Clean Development 

Mechanism and Joint Implementation $55,000

99.03.05 Sound Management of Chemicals Project $615,000

99.03.06 North American Pollutant Release and Transfer Register $270,000

99.03.07 Shared Approaches to By-product Synergy $70,000

99.03.08 Capacity Building for Pollution Prevention $85,000

I V – L a w a n d P o l i c y

99.04.01 North American Regional Enforcement Forum $72,000

99.04.02 Enforcement and Compliance Capacity Building $160,000

99.04.03 Indicators of Effective Environmental Enforcement $38,000

Total US $2,932,000
101

Annual Report 1998 } Looking Ahead

1999 Budget

General 

Description Amount (US $)

1 – Program 8,493,000

1.1) Projects 2,932,000

1.2) Salaries 2,750,000

1.3) NAFEC 990,000

1.4) Specific obligations 575,000

1.5) Publications and reports 410,000

1.6) Rent (program) 360,000

1.7) Council session (incl. public session) 220,000

1.8) JPAC operations 150,000

1.9) Telecommunications (program) 76,000

1.10) Common program-related expenditures 30,000

2 – Administration and support 1,402,000

2.1) Salaries 465,000

2.2) Public outreach 270,000

2.3) Assets 120,000

2.4) External administrative support 195,000

2.5) Executive management 80,000

2.6) Office equipment and supplies 95,000

2.7) Rent (non-program) 60,000

2.8) Relocation & orientation 80,000

2.9) Professional development 20,000

2.10) Telecommunications (non-program) 17,000

3 – Contingency fund 175,000

Total 10,070,000

Summary 

Description Amount (US $)

1 – Program 8,493,000

2 – Administration and support 1,402,000

3 – Contingency 175,000

Total 10,070,000

Revenues 

Description Amount (US $)

Parties’ contributions 9,000,000

Carry-over 105,000

Tax levy 865,000

Interest 100,000

Total 10,070,000
102

1999 Budget – Graphic Overview

Overall CEC Budget for 1999 

Program

Administration and Support

34.5% Projects 

32.4% Salaries 

11.7% NAFEC

6.8% Specific obligations

4.8% Publications and reports

0.4% Common program-related

expenditures 

0.9% Telecommunications 

(program) 

1.8% JPAC operations 

2.6% Council session 

(incl. public session)

4.2% Rent (program) 

1.2% Telecommunications 

(non-program)

1.4% Professional development

4.3% Rent (non-program)

5.7% Relocation & orientation 

5.7% Executive management 

6.8% Office equipment and 

supplies

33.2% Salaries 

19.3% Public outreach 

13.9% External administrative

support

8.6% Assets

84.3% Program 

13.9% Administration and support 

1.7% Contingency fund 
103

Annual Report 1998 } CEC Secretariat Directory

Janice Astbury

NAFEC Coordinator 

Tel: (514) 350-4353 

e-mail: jastbury@ccemtl.org

Greg Block

Director

Tel: (514) 350-4320 

e-mail: gblock@ccemtl.org 

Eduardo Delgadillo

Administrator

Tel: (514) 350-4354 

e-mail: edelgadi@ccemtl.org 

Charles Dickson

Director of Communications

Tel: (514) 350-4308 

e-mail: cdickson@ccemtl.org

Janine Ferretti

Executive Director

Tel: (514) 350-4303

Nathalie Daoust

Executive Assistant 

Tel: (514) 350-4318 

e-mail: ndaoust@ccemtl.org 

Hernando Guerrero

Head, Capacity Building and Mexico Office Liaison 

Tel: (525) 659-5021 

e-mail: cca@df1.telmex.net.mx 

Andrew L. Hamilton

Head, Science Division and Program Manager, 

Sound Management of Chemicals 

Tel: (514) 350-4332 

e-mail: ahamilto@ccemtl.org 

Hans Herrmann

Program Manager, Biodiversity Conservation 

Tel: (514) 350-4340 

e-mail: hherrman@ccemtl.org 

Douglas Kirk

Managing Editor, English Language Publications 

Tel: (514) 350-4352 

e-mail: dkirk@ccemtl.org 

Raymonde Lanthier

Managing Editor, French Language Publications 

Tel: (514) 350-4322 

e-mail: rlanthier@ccemtl.org 

Miguel López

Managing Editor, Spanish Language Publications

Tel: (514) 350-4358 

e-mail: mlopez@ccemtl.org 

David Markell

Head, Submissions on Enforcement Matters Unit 

Tel: (514) 350-4355 

e-mail: dmark@ccemtl.org 

*As of October 1999 

Nick Nikkila

Program Manager, Air Quality 

Tel: (514) 350-4337 

e-mail: nnikkila@ccemtl.org 

Marc Paquin 

Council Secretary and Program Manager, 

Special Legal Projects

Tel: (514) 350-4324 

e-mail: mpaquin@ccemtl.org 

Darlene A. Pearson

Head, Law and Policy Program

Tel: (514) 350-4334

e-mail: dpearson@ccemtl.org 

Manon Pepin 

JPAC Coordinator and Special Projects Manager

Tel: (514) 350-4305 

e-mail: mpepin@ccemtl.org

Jack Person

Controller 

Tel: (514) 350-4356 

e-mail: jperson@ccemtl.org 

Erica Phipps

Program Manager, Technical Cooperation 

Tel: (514) 350-4323 

e-mail: ephipps@ccemtl.org 

Martha Rosas

Program Manager, Conservation 

Tel: (514) 350-4326 

e-mail: mrosas@ccemtl.org 

Carla Sbert

Legal Officer, Submissions on 

Enforcement Matters Unit 

Tel: (514) 350-4321 

e-mail: csbert@ccemtl.org 

Marcos Silva

Manager, Network and Information Services 

Tel: (514) 350-4348 

e-mail: msilva@ccemtl.org 

Jeffrey Stoub

Publications Coordinator 

Tel: (514) 350-4327 

e-mail: jstoub@ccemtl.org 

Scott Vaughan

Program Manager, Environment and Economy 

Tel: (514) 350-4302 

e-mail: svaughan@ccemtl.org 

Cristóbal Vignal

Coordinator, Global Strategies and Program Liaison 

Tel: (514) 350-4333 

e-mail: cvignal@ccemtl.org 

CEC Secretariat Directory*

103
Credits

Design

Mosaïc Design Communication Inc.

Prepress and Printing

Imprimerie Quebecor GraphiqueCouleur

Printing Information

Paper

Cover - Rolland Opaque New Life/160 m

Text - Rolland Opaque New Life/140 m,

Satin

30% post-consumer fiber

100% elemental chlorine free

Inks

Vegetable oil based inks containing

no chlorine or heavy metals

Fountain Solution

No isopropyl alcohol/

less than 4% VOCs

Press Washes

Low VOC press washes used

Disponible en français

Disponible en español

Printed in Canada
COMMISSION FOR 

ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION

COMISIÓN PARA LA 

COOPERACIÓN AMBIENTAL

COMMISSION DE 

COOPÉRATION ENVIRONNEMENTALE

393, rue St-Jacques Ouest

Bureau 200

Montréal (Québec)

Canada H2Y 1N9

Tel.: (514) 350-4300

Fax: (514) 350-4314

In North America, we share vital natural resources,

including air, oceans and rivers, mountains and

forests. Together, these natural resources are the

basis of a rich network of ecosystems that sustain 

our livelihoods and well-being. If they are to 

continue being a source of future life and prosperity,

these resources must be protected. Protecting the

North American environment is a responsibility

shared by Canada, Mexico and the United States.

The Commission for Environmental Cooperation

(CEC) is an international organization whose 

members include Canada, Mexico and the United

States. The CEC was created under the North

American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation

(NAAEC) to address regional environmental concerns,

help prevent potential trade and environmental 

conflicts and to promote the effective enforcement

of environmental law. The Agreement complements

the environmental provisions established in the

North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

To find out more about the CEC’s act

ities, or to get up-to-date information 

the projects described in this Annu

Report, including related announc

ments and publications, please visit t

CEC’s Internet homepage or contact 

using the addresses below.

http://www.cec.or

E-mail: info@ccemtl.or