**FINAL VERSION Officially approved by the Chair and Board at the Brownsville, Texas**  **GNEB Board Meeting, July24 -** **25, 2007 subject to edits duly**

**incorporated into text that follows**



## Meeting Summary/Minutes
**The Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting** 

**Sky Room, Hotel Washington 515 15**  **th Street NW**  **Washington, DC March 13**  **- 14, 2007** 

Administration: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Cooperative Environmental ManagementGood Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting March 13

- 14, 2007 

### Table of Contents

Participants
................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 1 Welcome and Introductions
................................ ................................ ....................... .5 Panel Discussion on the Tenth Report: Environmental Protection and Border Security on the U.S.

- Mexico Border
................................ ................................ ......... .6 Key note Remarks
................................ ................................ ........................... 6 Panel I : Undocumented Human Crossings
................................ .................... .7 Panel II: Hazardous Materials Crossings
................................ ....................... .9 Public Comme nt Session .......................................................... 11 Speaker Briefings on Eleventh Report Theme: “Natural Hazards and the U.S.

- Mexico: Border Environment
................................ ................................ .................... 12 Introduction and Overview .........................................................12 Key note Address
................................ ................................ ............................ 13 USGS Senior Science Advisor for Earthquakes and Geological Hazards
.... 13 Office International Affairs, FEMA, DHS
................................ .................... 14 Office of Preparedness and Emergency Operations, HHS
............................ 16 Consejo Consultivo Report
................................ ................................ ........................ 18 Business Meeting and Strategic Planning Session
................................ .................... 19 Membership Introductions and Goals
................................ ............................ 19 Ap proval of the Minutes from Last Meeting
................................ ................. 19 Discussion of Eleventh Report
................................ ................................ ...... 20 Strategic Planning Session
................................ ................................ ............. 23 Remarks from the EPA Administrator
................................ .......................... 25 Board Member Report

- Outs
................................ ................................ .......... 27 Wrap Up and Adjournment
................................ ................................ ........... 27 Appendix: L ist of Public Attendees
................................ ................................ ........... 28EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 3 March 13

- 14, 2007 

## The Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting

**Sky Room, Hotel Washington 515 15**  **th Street NW**  **Washington, DC March 13**  **- 14, 2007**  

### Meeting Participants: **Non -**  **Federal Board Members**

 Paul Ganster, Ph.D., Director, Institute for Regional Studies of the Californias, San Diego State University, Chair, San Diego, California  Christopher P. Brown, Ph.D., Associate Professor, New Mexico State University , Las Cruces, New Mexico  Michael P. Dorsey , Chief, Hazardous Materials Division, San Diego County Department of Environmental Health  Edward Elbrock, Rancher, Malpai Borderlands Group, Animas, New Mexico  Gary Gillen, President, Gillen Pest Control, Richmond, Texas  Susan Keith, Southern Regional Director, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), Tucson, Arizona  Patti Krebs, Executive Director, Industrial Environmental Association (IEA)  Jennifer A. Montoya, U.S. Program Director, Chihuahuan Desert Conservation Project, World Wildlife Fund, Las Cruces, New Mexico  Stephen M. Niemeyer, P.E., Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Austin, Texas  Robert Varady, Ph.D., Deputy Director, Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy , University

of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona  Ann Marie A. Wolf, President, Sonora Environment Research Institute, Tucson, Arizona  John Wood, Commissioner, Cameron Count y, City of Brownsville, Texas
**Federal Board Members**

 Daniel D. Darrach, Coordinator, U.S.

- Mexico Border Affairs, U.S. Department of State (DOS), Washington, DC  Marily

n DiSirio, Associate Director of Global Health, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Atlanta, Georgia  Carl Edlund, Director of Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, Region 6, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Dallas, Texas  Li nda Lawson, Director, Safety , Energy and the Environment, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 3 March 13

- 14, 2007

 Carlos Marin, Commissioner, U.S. Section, International Boundary and Water Commission, (IBWC), El Paso, Texas  Gary Robison, Acting Associate Chief, Office of Border Patrol, U.S. Department of Homeland Securit y (DHS)  Rosendo Treviño, Special Assistant to the Chief, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), San Antonio, Texas  Shannon H. Sorzano, Deputy Assistant Secretary

for International Affairs, Department of Hou sing and Urban Development (HUD)  James Stefanov, U.S. Geological Service (USGS), U.S. Department of Interior, (DOI), Austin, Texas **Resource Specialists and Agency Alternates**  Christina Machion Quilaqueo, Program Anal ys t, HUD,Washington, DC  Rachael Po ynter, Office of Mexico Affairs, DOS, Washington, DC  Sally Spener, Public Affairs Officer, IBWC, El Paso, Texas  Lana Corales, CDC, DHHS, Atlanta Georgia **Consejo Consultivo de Desarrollo Sustenable Representative, SEMARNAT**  Flavio Olivieri, Northwest Region Rep resentative **EPA/OCEM Staff and Management**  Elaine Koerner, GNEB Designated Federal Officer (DFO)  Rafael DeLeon, OCEM Director  Mark Joyce, OCEM Associate Director  Geraldine Brown  Juliana Madrid  Lois Williams  Jannell Young

- Ancrum **Speakers:**  Jerry Clifford, U .S. Coordinator, Border 2012 Program, and Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of International Affairs, EPA  David V. Aguilar, Chief, U.S. Border Patrol, DHS  John C. Twiss, Director, Law Enforcement & Investigations, U.S. Forest Service, USDA  Larry R. Parkinson, Deputy

Assistant Secretary , Law Enforcement and Security , DOI  Dana Tulis, Deputy Director, Office of Solid Waste andEmergency Response, EPA  Bob Richard, Deput y Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, DOT  Todd Owens, Executive Direc tor, Cargo and Conveyance Securit y, DHS, for Jayson P. Ahern, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations, CPB, DHS  Jorge Navarro, Border Coordinator, Mexican Foreign Ministry  David Applegate, Senior Science Advisor for Earthquakes and Geological Hazards, USGS, DOI  Sonja Neiuwejaar, Deputy Director, Office of International Affairs, FEMA, DHSEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 4 March 13

- 14, 2007

 Dr. Kevin Yeskey , M.D., Deputy Assistant Secretary

(Acting), Office of Preparedness and Emergency Operations, HHS  Flavio Olivieri, NW Region Representative, Cons ejo Consultivo, SEMARNAT **Public Commenters:**

 Juan Antonio Flores, Public Affairs Director, North American Development Bank  Karen Senhadji, International Affairs, DOI  Lisa Almodovar, Mexico Team Leader, OIA, EPA **Public Attendees: See Appendix**EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 5 March 13

- 14, 2007



## Meeti **ng Summary/Minutes**
**DRAFT/DRAFT/DRAFT/DRAFT** Background The Good Neighbor Environmental Board (GNEB or the Board) is an independent advisory committee that is managed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It advises the U.S. President and C ongress on good

- neighbor practices along the U.S.

- Mexico border. The focus is on the environmental and infrastructure needs of the U.S. states that are contiguous to Mexico.



### Day 1

**– March 13. 2007**  (9:00 a.m.) Media event to publicl y release the Good Neighbor Environmental Board (GNEB) Tenth Report to the President and Congress preceded the Board meeting 

### Welcome and Opening Remarks (10:00 a.m.) **Dr. Ganster, Ph.D,. Chair** , welcomed Board members and guests to the Good Neighbor Environmental Board (GNEB) meeting and asked board members to introduce themselves. **Elaine Koerner, Designated Federal Officer** (DFO) asked members of the audience to introduce themselves. Self

- introductions took place Chair Ganster then gave an overview of the T enth Report for those who had not attended the media event preceding the meeting. He stated that the Tenth Report looked at the effects of securit y activities in two areas: ports of entry and in more rural areas of the border region. For the more rural areas, the Board recommended strengthening communication and collaboration among security agencies, environmental protection agencies, and land management agencies so as to both provide security and also maintain quality of life for border communities. The Board also recommended employing a mix of technology and personnel to reflect the differing geographical terrain and population groupings along diverse sections of the border. For ports of entry , where hazardous materials (hazmat) can provide an added se curit y risk, the Board recommends increasing the number of hazmat inspectors onsite. It also recommends establishing sites and hours specific for hazmat vehicles, which have increased due to expanded trade between the U.S. and Mexico. In addition, the Bo ard calls for more extensive information sharing between environmental agencies and security agencies. Moreover, the Board says in its report, liability issues need to be resolved for cross

- borderEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 6 March 13

- 14, 2007
emergency

responders. And, finally , information needs to be shared with tribal communities about hazardous materials being transported across their lands. 

### Morning Panel Sessions on the Tenth Report **Keynote Rem arks**  (10:15 a.m.) **Jerry Clifford, Deputy Assistant Administrator for International Affairs and U.S.**  **Coordinator, Border 2012 Program,** congratulated the GNEB on the Tenth Report and noted that the meeting attendees included a broad representation of federal agencies and other border security experts dealing with border security and environmental iss ues. Mr. Clifford was also pleased with the cooperation between the GNEB and the Border 2012 program in solving the many public health and environmental border problems For the GNEB reports and recommendations, Mr. Clifford asked that the Board consider the policy implications of their topics, recommendations, and advice for border enforcement and environmental protection agencies. For Border 2012, Mr. Clifford discussed the U.S.

-Mexico Environmental Program Border 2012 Midterm Report and enumerated th e guiding principles. Principles related to GNEB included fostering public and stakeholder participation, reducing the highest public health and environmental risks, recognizing the sovereignty of U.S. tribes, and addressing the disproportionate environme ntal impacts on border citizens. Mr. Clifford then reported on the accomplishments of the Border 2012 in cooperation with Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC), North American Development Bank (NADBank), and the IBWC, including funds for water and wastewater infrastructure projects, removing tire piles and hazardous wastes, and improving tracking of information on border facilities and hazardous waste. Border 2012 is working with the American Indian Office to develop a North American conferenc e on indigenous communities dealing with the environment and public health. Mr. Clifford described the work of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) and its three major areas of focus. The CEC’s advisory groups have recommended integrating the work of the CEC, Border 2012, and the GNEB. The CEC would be glad to discuss areas of cooperation. In response to questions about funding related to policy recommendations for the border region, Mr. Clifford said the EPA budget for FY2007 was just approved b y Congress at the FY2006 level. By removing the earmarks, Congress was able to retain the FY2006 level for water and water infrastructure projects for the NADBank and the BECC. The Southwest Center for Environmental Research and policy (SCERP) is z eroed out for FY2007. For FY2008, the President recommended onl y $10 million for border infrastructure. The Office of International Affairs budget would be reduced b y 20 percent. The funds for extramural projects would be cut b y 50 percent to $1 million . In Mexico, the same office received a 25 percent reduction under the new administration of President Felipe Calderón.EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 7 March 13

- 14, 2007 In response to a suggestion about partnering with DHS to fund some projects, Mr. Clifford thought there might be opportunities to wor k with DHS to leverage resources for public health and environmental issues. The GNEB Tenth Report could facilitate this dialogue. 

### Panel 1: Undocu **me nted Hu**  **ma n Crossings**  (10:30 a.m.) Chair Ganster introduced the first panel, which had been charged wi th discussing their feedback on the Board’s recommendations about security and environmental protection related to undocumented human crossings between ports of entry
. **David V. Aguilar, Chief, U.S. Border Patrol, DHS** , stated that DHS Border Patrol strateg y is focused on reducing illegal entries of terrorists and drug and human smugglers, as well as using non

- intrusive technologies and improving quality of life. The Border Patrol operates in three environments: urban, rural, and remote areas. Different strategies and technologies are needed for the different environments. The Border Patrol’s goal is to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of resources while minimizing the intrusiveness of border patrol activities. **John C. Twiss, Director, Law Enforce ment & Investigations, U.S. Forest Service,**  **Department of Agriculture (USDA)** , stated that the Forest Service could support the recommendations of the GNEB Tenth Report. The Report shows a clear understanding of the issues, the agency ’s mission, the value of risk, and the barriers to achieving both resource protections and border security. The Forest Service agrees with the need for collaboration among the various agencies and with employing a mix of technologies and people to achieve these goals. Mr. T wiss provided a brief Forest Service update regarding border security and natural resource issues, particularly in the 60

- mile border of the Coronado National Forest, which is an unsafe area. The problems are importation of illegal drugs, armed drug and human smugglers, illegal growing of marijuana in more than 40 national forests, and damage from foot traffic, trash, abandoned vehicles, garbage, erosion, and destruction of wildlife habitat. Mr. Twiss lauded the efforts of Chief Aguilar in improving the relationship between the Border Patrol and the Forest Service b y forming an interagency task force, employing a land management coordinator, developing an MOU between USDA and DOI, and co

- locating facilities. Best management practices are being promoted f or Border Patrol activities. Mr. Twiss discussed the Tenth Report challenges as they pertain to the Forest Service. The Forest Service is identifying sensitive resources, strengthening communication with the public, and would consider establishing an off ice to anal yz e the impact of border security on the environment. The problem with the second challenge of clean

- up is the safet y of bringing in volunteers. The Forest Service agrees with the report’s third challenge as cited: damage to wildlife from fenc ing. **Larry R. Parkinson, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Law Enforcement and Security, Department of Interior (DOI)**  , stated that the GNEB Tenth Report was a balanced report.EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 8 March 13

- 14, 2007 The agency

agrees with the conclusions and they look forward to working with the GN EB to implement the recommendations. The important aspect of the public’s and rangers’ safety needs more development in the report. Rangers have been threatened b y s mugglers, who use a wide variet y of sophisticated weapons and technology. Secretary Kemp thorne, after a visit to the border area, said the government has lost control of public lands. In the remote areas, flexibility

in ty pes of barriers is the key
. Mr. Parkinson focused on the collaboration between DOI, DHS, and the Forest Service based o n a MOU signed by the three Secretaries that includes environmental sensitivity
. DOI has a law enforcement component, and about 200 of 4,000 officers are deployed in the Southwest border area. He noted Chief Aguilar’s work in developing a Public L ands Li aison Agent in every

Border Patrol sector, who would work with the public land managers to address environmental issues. He agreed with the Report’s statement that vigorous border securit y can actuall y prevent or limit harm to the environment by apprehending people as soon as possible, and also prevent some of the 200 deaths a ye ar in the desert. **Panel I Questions and Comments** In response to a question about displacement of illegal persons and activities to Texas because of border patrol activities in Arizona, Chief Aguilar agreed that displacement would occur, but they

are increasing resources and infrastructure to prevent criminal activity along the Texas border as well. By the end of September, a security s ys tem would cover 72 miles at the Texas border . Under the SBI Net program, $1.2 billion will be spent to increase surveillance. As to whether the National Guard could be used to provide safety for park management employees, Mr. Parkinson said the National Guard is assisting the Border Patrol in bu ilding infrastructure, but is not engaged in law enforcement activities. Chief Aguilar added that in Operation Jump Start , more than 6,000 National Guard personnel enabled them to gain over 340 miles of additional surveillance. By the end of FY2008, DOI will have 18,500 personnel, up from 12,550 currentl y working at the border. Robert Varady brought up the difference between border patrol activities which appeared to focus on illegal activity

rather than on preventing terrorists from entering the country. Chief Aguilar responded that the vast amount of clutter and illegal activity at the border must be mitigated to prevent the possibility of terrorists entering the border. The ports of entry are guarded b y the Office of Field Operations, not the Border Patrol. Mr. Parkinson added that in 2005, 366 illegal aliens from special interest countries, including Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, were apprehended at the borders. Three of these aliens later were convicted of terrorist activities. Susan Keith expressed concern about the use of Border Patrol checkpoints in fragile environmental areas as opposed to highway s in Arizona. Chief Aguilar responded that checkpoints use a wide range of technical devices to avoid environmental damage and need to cover remote areas, not just highway s.EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 9 March 13

- 14, 2007 

### Panel II: Hazardous Materials Crossings (11:30 a.m.) Chair Ganster stated that the next Panel would focus on hazardous material crossings. **Dana Tulis, Deputy, Office of Emergency Management, Office of Solid Was te and**  **Emergency Response, EPA** , said she serves as the Co

- Chair of the Border 2012 Emergency Preparedness and Response Program Workgroup (BWWG), which was set up under the 1983 L a Paz agreement between the U.S. and Mexico under the auspices of EPA and its Mexican counterpart SEMARNAT. An official from the Mexican enforcement agency , Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiente (PROFEPA), serves as the other Co

- Chair. The Workgroup operates as the steering committee for the Joint Response Team (JRT), whi ch is similar to the U.S. National Response Team (NRT). The NRT coordinates 14 agency efforts and serves as a backup of resources for local and states’ first responders. The JRT includes U.S. and Mexican national agencies, as well as state and local agen cies and tribes along both sides of the border. Some of the BWWG accomplishments to date in emergency preparedness and response include developing 14 sister city emergency

response plans, training personnel, conducting tabletop and field exercises on hazardous materials, and revising the Joint Contingency Plan to coordinate international, state and local efforts to improve communication. The Workgroup’s initiatives for 2006/2007 have included testing and updating the notification sy stem between Mexico and the U.S.; expediting cross

- border responses for people and equipment under the Trusted Traveler Program; securing liability insurance coverage for local emergency cross - border responders, and strengthening partnerships with U.S. and Mexican offices at all levels, including CBP, NorthCom (DOD asset), Protección Civil, CENACOM, and Aduanas. **Bob Richard, Associate Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Department of Transportation (DOT)**  , provided an overview of his adm inistration, which works with other offices within DOT to regulate hazardous materials transportation. One of his collateral duties is as Chairman of the United Nations Subcommittee on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, which writes regulations on internat ional transport. Prior to 1992, Mr. Richard said, Mexico did not have any hazardous materials regulations, so PHMSA worked with officials there to establish these regulations. PHMSA has responsibilities in the areas of enforcement, planning, and trainin g, and writes regulations for carriers, shippers, manufacturers, and governments. PHMSA inspectors cannot cover all of the law enforcement activities, so this area is shared with state and local governments. Training has been done on both sides of the border for emergency response teams, carriers and shippers. The goal for the hazmat program is to prevent risk by working with hazmat transporters on increasing safety and security . PHMSA works with other Federal agencies, such as the Federal Aviation Adm inistration, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the Department of HomelandEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 10 March 13

- 14, 2007 Security (DHS) to enforce regulations under their modalities. PHMSA meets twice a year with Mexico to ensure that regulations are harmonized. Development and dissemination of training and i nformation materials is a major part of enhancing hazardous materials transportation safety. Other materials available include a CD on hazmat and security awareness, training videos, and an emergency response guidebook. **Todd Owens, Executive Director, C argo and Conveyance Security, Office of Field**  **Operations, DHS ,**  spoke on behalf of Jayson Ahern , Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations , who was on travel to Canada. The Office of Field Operations has responsibility

for operations within the 32 4 official ports of entry , of which 42 are on the Mexican border. Mr. Owens is responsible for cargo programs, including inspection technology , gamma and x

- ray imaging s ys tems, and all radiation portal detection equipment. The agency

employ s a risk mana gement approach to detect whether the 29.5 million containers and trailers that enter the U.S. each ye ar, whether b y l and or sea, contain hazardous materials, weapons of mass destruction, illegal humans, narcotics, or illegal weapons. Mr. Owens described some of the methods used to detect illegal or dangerous cargo: an automated targeting s ys tem, assignment of a risk score, and imaging s ys tems. Radiation portal monitors enables screening to be improved compared with a year ago. An industry partnership al lows the agency to secure the supply

chain through the Customs Trade Partnership against Terrorism. In addition, the Free and Secure Trade (FAST) Program requires that all truck drivers carryi ng hazmat materials from Canada and Mexico possess a FAST card , which speeds up transport. A layered enforcement strategy allows them to assign a risk based on a risk score. Hazmat materials inspection is assisted by state and local officers. **Panel II Questions and Comments** Carl Edlund asked if the country is prepared for multiple ty pes of threats. Ms. Tulis answered that EPA is doing gaps anal ys is to prepare for five simultaneous events. Flavio Olivieri asked whether Mexican trucks carrying hazmat materials were allowed to obtain a FAST pass and cross the borde r, and if RFID technologies are used to track hazmat containers. Mr. Richard said that Mexican hazmat trucks can come into a commercial zone in the U.S., but cannot go long

- haul. RFID is one method to track hazardous materials. The ty pe of approach depe nds on the degree of risk.



### Public Comm **ent Session** (12:30 p.m.)EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 11 March 13

- 14, 2007
DFO Koerner announced the meeting was open for public comments. Three people were signed up to speak: Karen Sennhadji, Juan Antonio Flores, and Li sa Almodovar. **Karen Senhdaji ,**  **U. S. Department of Interior (DOI),** wanted to highlight the dedication of DOI biologists, archeologists and interpretative rangers, who have stayed onsite in their public lands positions along the border despite the challenges. The Bureau of Land Manageme nt staff has had a long history of working with the border patrol in exchanging information about eco

- sensitive areas and different cultures. Ms. Senhadji also said that BLM also talked to colleagues about the importance of Border Patrol techniques in pro viding security
. **Juan Antonio Flores, Public Affairs Director, North American Development Bank (NADBank)**  thanked the Board for its letters of support, which were instrumental in advancing the policy

initiatives of the institution. The newl y established j oint Board of Directors for both NADBank and BECC has met twice, and a large number of projects have been approved for financing. The total amount of funding for projects is now $844.42 million. The majority

of the funds, around $493.9 million, come from EPA’s border fund. The total cost of the 98 projects is more than $2.5 billion. In the U.S.

- Mexico border area, there are now 17 communities that are provided for the first time with wastewater treatment service. The problem is that EPA’s border fund has continued to diminish over the years, from $100 million down to $50 million. Even worse, the FY2008 budget for the Border Environmental In frastructure Fund (BEIF) is only $10 million. The pace of BECC and NADBank projects development and financing o f basic water and wastewater infrastructure projects would be significantl y impacted at that funding level were this figure to be the final funding figure. Mr. Flores invited GNEB members to the NADBank/BECC Board meeting on March 27, 2007, in San Anton io, Texas. He said the NADBank/BECC Board would be considering several potential projects in the new sectors of renewable energy , air quality , etc., as well as basic water, wastewater, and solid waste projects. Many of these projects are private sector i nitiatives. **Questions and Comments for Mr. Flores** Stephen Niemeyer asked whether the explanation for the decreased funding was related to the slowness of fund disbursement for projects b y the NADBank. Mr. Flores answered that NADBank is moving to accele rate fund disbursement by full y funding projects that are approved and under way . Funding is required up front for project development, and has been held up b y political considerations. For example, $60 million was designated for the international wastew ater treatment plant in Nogales, but has not been dispersed due to political and engineering dilemmas. NADBank needs to improve its coordination and oversight of local project sponsors to ensure that construction stay s on track and funds are disbursed acc ordingly
. In response to questions from Ms. Keith, Mr. Flores explained that NADBank is capitalized with funds from both the U.S. and Mexican governments, and this does not requireEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 12 March 13

- 14, 2007 Congressional approval. The BEIF grant is appropriated b y Congress and administered by NADBank. There is no annual federal grant program from Mexico to the Bank. Any funds from BEIF for projects in Mexico must be matched dollar

- for

- dollar by Mexico. Christopher Brown asked how to support the need for more funds. Mr. Flores answered that Congress makes the decisions, but key stakeholders in the area, such as the U.S.

- Mexico Chamber of Commerce, the Border Trade Alliance, etc., need to provide support. Chair Ganster added that the border environmental projects in general are having difficulty in gaining Congressional support throughout the country . After said discussion, Christopher Brown suggested that the Board write a Comment Letter on the topic. **Lisa Almodovar, Office of International Affairs, EPA,** addressed the budgetary problem of the Border 2012 program, which would lose one

- third of its budget in the proposed FY2008 budget. Border 2012 is asking its stakeholders and partners to provide ideas about priorities and way s to help border communities with their environmenta l problems. She invited GNEB members to the National Coordinators meeting on May 22, 2007, in San Antonio and to provide comments on the Border 2012 program. **Questions and comments for Ms. Almodovar** DFO Koerner asked if there was a deadline for comments. Ms. Almodovar responded that comments could be received prior to the May meeting or before November. In November, they will be putting everyone’s comments into a refined addendum for FY2008. Michael Dorsey was concerned because Border 2012 had been cut back every year, which he felt was unacceptable. Chair Ganster and DFO Koerner suggested that this issue be discussed in the following day ’s GNEB business meeting. 

### Afternoon Speaker Briefings on the Eleventh Report Them **e: Natural Hazards and the U**  **.S. -**  **Mexico Border Environm ent**  **Introduction and Overview** (2:00 p.m.) Chair Ganster opened the afternoon session b y stating that the Board would hear from several experts on the major issues for the GNEB Eleventh Report, whose theme was the environmental effects of natural hazards at the border. Chair Ganster asked members to focus on the policy implications related to environmental and infrastructure issues. To date, the Eleventh Report has been discussed at the GNEB Alpine Texas meeting and in a conference call. These discussions provided three options for structuring the report and developing workgroups as follows: 1) Focus on the context that would include the ty

pe of disaster, location, history , institutional framework. The ty pes of disasters include wind and water, hurricanes, occasional tornadoes, fires and earthquakes; 2) Focus on context, mitigation, and preparedness, and then look at response, recovery , and rebuilding of human sy stems; and 3) Focus on context, effects, and responses relate d to human health, species, and eco s ys tems effects.EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 13 March 13

- 14, 2007
Mr. Treviño , Ms. DiSirio, and Mr. Niemeyer suggested adding drought as a ty pe of disaster due to the effects of desertification on agriculture, mass migration to the urban areas, and global climate change. 

### Keynote Rem **arks** (2:15 p.m.) **Jorge Navarro, Border Coordinator, Mexican Foreign Ministry** , said that the new Ambassador of Mexico sends his greetings and recognizes the outstanding work of the GNEB. Mr. Navarro focused his remarks on emergenc y preparedness and responses b y border communities to natural hazards that threaten the environment. The 1993 L a Paz Meeting definition of the border has been changed to include 300 kilometers inside Mexico. The 14 pair cities on the border face the same problems from natural hazards, air pollution, and solid waste disposal which affect the well

- being of populations. Mr. Navarro enumerated several natural hazards which had occurred in Mexico such as dust clouds, flooding in El Paso, and forest fires in C alifornia. To provide a common response to these disasters, the U.S.

- Mexico Joint Response Team was established b y the La Paz agreement. The JRT has representatives from the U.S. and Mexico, federal, state, and local agencies responsible for emergency prevention, preparedness, and response in the border region. The JRT formed a Joint Contingency Plan (JCP) that established a federal mechanism for cooperation in responding to natural hazardous incidents. A better dialogue is needed between the U. S. National Response Center and the National Communications Center in Mexico. In Mexico, the Center for Environmental Emergencies of the Federal Attorney General for Environmental Protection also receives notification of disasters. The main question is whethe r the JCP recognizes all natural hazards. The JCP provides the foundation for establishing sister city , bi

- national, emergency responses. The JCP provides local emergency

response teams with the mechanisms for addressing cooperative issues and concerns and recommendations for emergency response planning, exercises, and training Mr. Navarro closed b y stating that the Eleventh Report should prove very useful to Mexico and Mexican authorities and researchers would like to participate in a mutual dialogue on the natural hazards report. Chair Ganster thanked Mr. Navarro for his remarks and agreed that input from Mexican authorities and researchers should be incorporated into the process. 

### Speakers (2:30 p.m.) **David Applegate, Senior Science Advisor for Earthquakes and Geological Hazards,**  **USGS, DOI**

**,** welcomed the opportunity to speak about the bi

- national issues and policy related to natural hazards at the border. The end goal is to reduce the vulnerabilities from both manmade threats and natural haz ards. Reduction of some vulnerabilities may create other problems, such as the mass population movement into formerly rural and hazardous areas. Mr. Applegate used a series of slides to cover the role USGS in managing six major natural hazards: earthquake s, hurricanes, flooding, drought, wildfires, and tsunamis.EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 14 March 13

- 14, 2007
The USGS has statutory

responsibility

for issuing warnings and notifications for earthquakes, volcanoes, and landslides, and provides support for NOAA for measuring tsunamis and floods. Mr. Ap plegate is a member of a Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction which is part of the White House National Science and Technology Council, consisting of 22 agencies that look at a wide range of natural disasters and their impact on society
. A detailed presentation of six ty pes of hazards was presented. Some of the topics included the President’s Disaster Declaration ; the Dare to Prepare Campaign ; the Drought Impact Reporter ; the earthquake potential from faults; hurricane and flooding damage in increasingl y po pulous areas; debris flow from former wildfires; a potential tsunami in the San Diego/Tijuana area.; and measuring drought with stream gauge data. **Questions and Comments** Chair Ganster asked about rating the likelihood of hazards and the concentration of resources. Mr. Applegate replied that it was difficult to quantify the impacts of hazards because of the variability in intensity and the degree of suddenness. Sally Spener commented that the IBWC operates and maintains the Rio Grande Flood Control Proje ct, which consists of levees that were in danger of breaching in the El Paso flood of 2006. Ms. Spener hoped that the Eleventh Report would consider the issues and make recommendations related to flood control and prevention of environmental damage. Dr. Brown asked if the science advisory effort linked floods and droughts to global climate change. Mr. Applegate replied that the Climate Change Research Program is coordinating efforts related to climate change. (3:15 p.m.) **Sonja Nieuwejaar, Director, O ffice of International Affairs, FEMA, Department of**  **Homeland Security,** stated that it was FEMA’s mission to assist the United States in mitigating, preparing for, responding to, and recovering from both manmade and natural hazards. Ms. Neiuwejaar would foc us on how the U.S. and its international counterparts are managing and responding to cross border events on the local, state, national, bi

- national, and tri

- national level. She provided a summary of emergency

management challenges and suggested recommendations for moving forward. One of the major incidents in 2006 was the Júarez L a Montada Dam Safet y Incident near El Paso. An international team consisting of the cities of El Paso and Júarez, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the IWB C, was assembled to avoi d potential disaster. Although cross

border communication was good, there are no cross

- border plans to address dam safety. The U. S. government could not provide direct assistance unless Mexico’s government requested it. The U.S. Ambassador must declare a disaster to allow the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to provide assistance. In the Arizona/Sonora Cross

- Border exercises; the states of Arizona and Sonora combined the four counties of Yuma, Pima, Santa Cruz, and Cochise under one re gion to hold bi

-EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 15 March 13

- 14, 2007 national exercises in an improvised explosive and hazardous material event. A series of similar exercises demonstrated the need for sister

- city , sister

- state, and bi

- national planning. After Hurricane Katrina, the U.S. developed cross

- border International Assistance Plans (IAS). The IAS established standard operating procedures for requesting assistance, reviewing offers, determining acceptability of offers, managing logistics and distributing commodities. Many

U.S. agencies are involved in IAS including the State Department, FEMA, USAID, and DOD. Ms. Nieuwejaar depicted twelve cross

- border bi

- national initiatives including contingency plans with Mexico and Canada. The Cross Border Tri

-National Initiatives of the Security and Prosperit y Partnership (SPP) provide a framework for cooperation between emergencies and for a potential avian influenza pandemic in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. The challenges of cross

- border emergency management include coordination, organization, legal, regulatory , operational, logistical, and financial. For organizational contacts, the definition of triggering events and responsibilities must be established. Legal and regulatory challenges make it difficult to determine what help can be given and accepted. Medical licensing and credentialing varies from country to country . Customs duties, passport requirements, and resource manifests must be waived. Interoperability

of equipment posed the largest challenge. Global standards are needed for emergency

resp onses. Command and control over personnel needs further discussion. Mobilization of resources requires specification of locations and handling equipment. Financial challenges related to reimbursement of expenses and transfer of funds. In dealing with the public, messages must be clear and the same for both countries. Cross

- border evacuation plans need development. In looking forward, the present initiatives at all governmental levels need to be reviewed and coordinated. Best practices and information need to be shared between plans. The various single hazard events may need to be coordinated into one emergency response plan. Lastly , an overall mutual assistance plan needs to be focused more on mitigation and preparedness activities so that informati on, data collection, training, and exercises could be shared. **Questions and Comments** Mr. Elbrock asked if drought should be considered a natural hazard. Ms. Nieuwejaar said that FEMA would treat drought the same as other emergency hazards, if it was so designated. Mr. Applegate said that drought is a different hazard due to its slow onset, but should be mitigated because of its significant impacts Mr. Varady commented that the U.S. should recognize Mexico as a good neighbor in managing emergencies. He thought that emergencies should be treated differentl y, with rules and regulations that are determined in advance. Ms. Nieuwejaar responded that regulations for accepting assistance were codified after Katrina and will be used in the next disaster.EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 16 March 13

- 14, 2007
Dr. Brown asked if FEMA had reviewed its procedures to identify problems. Ms. Nieuwejaar said that many agencies, including the White House Homeland Security Council and the Government Accountability Office, asked what FEMA was going to do to address probl ems in emergency management. Assistance agencies including FEMA, the State Department, and USAID reviewed and addressed problems and issues related to their purview to develop a s ys tem for the next disaster. John Wood described three examples of cross bo rder assistance provided by the City of Brownsville to disasters on the Mexican side of the border. He thought that “red tape” needed to be set aside in time of life

- threatening disaster. Mr. Wood also noted that his city had established good relations w ith border officials to ease cross

- border assistance. In response to a question about the new passport requirements in land boundary crossings, Rachel Poynter, Office of Mexico Affairs, U.S. Department of State (DOS) , said that DOS and DHS have not yet resolved that issue. Ms. Spener thought this should be addressed in the Eleventh Report. Ms. Spener asked if undocumented aliens could receive aid from FEMA. Ms. Nieuwejaar said she would need to go back to the agency for the answer to that question. M r. Dorsey asked if there was a plan for transporting medical supplies and patients across the border if resources were inadequate in the neighboring country
. Ms. Nieuwejaar said that USAID that would respond to an international disaster and determine if m edical assistance could be provided to another country . FEMA could decide if medical assistance could be accepted in the U.S. States have the responsibility to determine if medical certification could be waived. Mr. Edlund added that there is a structure for responding to emergencies that involves the federal, state and local governments’ emergency support sy stems and FEMA is the lead agency . He thought the structure should be reviewed for the Eleventh Report. In response to a request, DFO Koerner sai d Ms. Nieuwejaari’s presentation would be sent to Board members on a CD. (4:15 p.m.) **Kevin Yeskey, M.D., Deputy Assistant Secretary (Acting), Office of Preparedness and Emergency Operations (OPEO), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS),**  spoke from a medical and public health standpoint in describing the general approaches to hazards and challenges to international responses. The National Response Plan (NPR) currentl y being rewritten is for domestic response and is primarily a support mechanism for states and localities. A pandemic influenza event would require more Federal resources. Dr. Yeskey then described the focus of HHS in preparedness, response and recovery activities and public health considerations in an emergency
. The White House Repor

t on Hurricane Katrina recommended a single unified command and control center within HHS for all health and medical responses. The December 2006 Pandemic All Hazards Preparedness Act identified the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response as the lead official within HHS. The Emergency Support Function Eight services include public health, primary care, acute care, in

- patient care, and other duties suchEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 17 March 13

- 14, 2007 as victim identification. Under the Incident Command Sy stem, HHS responses are structured und er national standards. Some of the biggest public health problems include population displacement, rumor control, and secondary

effects on the environment. One of the biggest issues for preparedness is medical staff capacity . The National Disaster Med ical Sy stem has 6,000 volunteers in teams who are under the control of OPEO, and five rapid deploy ment teams, but very

few of these people have passports and could not be deplo yed internationally without waivers. Medical volunteers can be federalized to m ove across state lines, but foreign nationals cannot be federalized. Response and recovery

preparedness issues include clean

- up of water, air, debris, insects, microorganisms, and toxins. Sanitation sy stem restoration is needed to prevent wastewater go ing into rivers. **Questions and Comments** Chair Ganster indicated a concern about the population movement of around 100,000 Mexican nationals in Tijuana who could be on the U.S. side of the border during a disaster. Dr. Yeskey answered that states have mutual aid agreements and the FEMA compact managed b y DHS for bringing in resources. Chair Ganster asked about bringing in private companies’ medical resources. Dr. Yeskey agreed that private industry resources need to be utilized for medical assistance. Ms. DiSirio asked for an explanation of how the U.S. is able to respond to tsunamis or other disasters in foreign countries. Dr. Yeskey explained that requests from foreign nations are made through DOS to the President. USAID and DHS send a Disaster As sistance Response Team (DART) to assess the needs. DOD gets involved through its various commands, depending on the area. Funding for international responses is not structured as it is for national responses. In domestic disasters, HHS can deploy medica l resources through mission assignments. Internationall y, responses are slower, because resources are further away and duplication must be avoided. Ms. Spener commented that Mexico does not request foreign aid in the event of a disaster. Even though mutual aid does occur at the local level, she doubted that USAID’s response teams would be going into Mexico. Mr. Niemeyer asked if HHS had MOUs with Mexico for medical assistance. Ms. DiSirio, CDC, said that there were no MOUs with Mexico. CDC responds to requests from the Officer of Federal Disaster Assistance in the International Emergency Refugee Health Branch or from the World Health Organization. 

### Consejo Consultivo Report (5:00 p.m.) **Flavio Olivieri, Northwest Representative,** provided an update on the Consejo organizational structure and activities under SEMARNET. Personnel changes that have occurred include Felipe Calderón, President of Mexico; Juan Elvira, Secretary of theEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 18 March 13

- 14, 2007 Environment; and Mateo Castillo, Office of Civic Participation. The National Council meets on June 4
- 5, 2007 in Mexico City
. Mr. Olivieri invited Chair Ganster to the NW Regional Consejo on March 28

- 30, 2007, in Tijuana. The National Council will accept new members b y December, 2007. Some of the priorities and activitie s included development of a national strategic plan under the new President; follow

- up on the recommendations responded to b y the Secretary ; collaboration with SEMARNAT on the National Environmental Public Participation Strategies; and follow

- up on the All American Canal and border securit y s ys tems. Successes in 2006 included legal marine zoning in the sea of Cortez, participation in the Fourth World Water Forum, and development of the National Sustainable Development Education Program with the Department of Education. **Questions and Comments** In response to a question about marine environmental zoning, Mr. Olivieri explained that it was an effort b y several agencies to agree on how to use and protect the Sea of Cortez in view of the competition between tourism, commercial industries, fisheries, and indigenous communities. Chair Ganster asked about the sustainable development projects and how the new administration might affect future activities. Mr. Olivieri responded that the Calderón administration had u sed the word “sustainability ,” in all their proposals. SEMARNAT seems to be getting more support and giving more authority to state governments. In formation on environmental events is being shared with Consejo Councils. Ms. Krebs asked if businesses ar e regulated differently in the states or regions. Mr. Olivieri replied that the federal law should be applied nationwide, although states may have different regulations. More authority is being given to the states and municipalities in the new Administrat ion. **Adjournment:** The meeting was adjourned at **5:07 p.m.**EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 19 March 13

- 14, 2007


### Day 2

**– March 14, 2007**  (8:00 a.m.) 

### Business Meeting and Strategic Planning Session **Business Meeting New Member Introductions, Goals for Board Membership**  DFO Elaine Koerner opened the business meeting and welcomed the three new, non

Federal members: Patti Krebs, John Wood, and Susan Keith. Daniel Darrach , Department of State, and Gary Robinson , DHS, were recently appointed Federal members. After the new members spoke briefly about their interests, Chair Ganster presented them with GNEB pins. Sally Spener noted that President Bush, at a meeting in Mexico that week, issued a statement about the need for cooperation on trade, immigration, and security between both countries and ack nowledged the need to protect their shared natural resources. **Approval of the Minutes** Chair Ganster asked if there were an y changes to the minutes. Stephen Niemeyer and Christopher Brown provided DFO Koerner with some minor corrections and ty pographical errors which would be incorporated before the minutes are posted on the website. Several members thought the minutes were well done. Gary Gillen moved adoption of the minutes with changes as provided to DFO Koerner. Dr. Brown seconded the motion and th e minutes were approved unanimously
. **Dissemination Plan for the Tenth Report** DFO Koerner briefly

reviewed the dissemination plan for the GNEB Tenth Report. She asked members to note the number of reports they would like to receive and indicate where they could distribute the report. Dr. Brown suggested making a one page summary of the key highlights, with a brief cover letter and a URL for the GNEB website link, for distribution to Congressional Offices and other busy , influential people. Ms. Montoya offered to have the World Wildlife Fund office in Mexico City distribute the report to the Mexican border delegation. Another member suggested sending the report to the EPA attaché in Mexico. DFO Koerner acknowledged that the distribution sy stem was not sy stematic. She encouraged members to distribute copies to colleagues and at meetings and to report back to her for the tracking report. Around 4,000 copies had been printed. The possibility of using CDs or DVDs could be discussed in the future.EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 20 March 13

- 14, 2007



### Dis **cussion of the Eleventh Report** (8:30 a.m.) To focus the Board’s thinking on the GNEB mission of advising the President and Congress on environmental infrastructure issues, DFO Koerner proposed four questions as follows: 1. How are air, water, waste, and related infrastructure affected b y border region natural hazards? 2. How are human and environmental health affected? 3. Why does the border region deserve special focus in terms of this issue? 4. What can and should the Federal Government do to better manage natural resources in the border region to better protect human health and the environment? Mr. Niemeyer commented that state and local governments and other partners should be included in Question 4. Ms. Keith thought one of the main questions was “Why shoul d EPA be involved? She added that if a huge earthquake happened in another state, it could affect Arizona in terms of population displacement, and health concerns would be paramount. Mr. Gillen and Dr. Brown identified the need to heed Mr. Clifford’s urg e to keep the report relevant to science

- based policy and to focus on actionable events. DFO Koerner added that the report should clearl y communicate what is the current policy and sy stem and what changes are being recommended. Ms. Keith added that the r eport should focus on emerging issues that would need new policy
. Ms. Montoya thought the focus should be on current programs and responsibilities. Mr. Stefanov said that the connection between the selected topic and the border environment needs to be cl early stated. Gary Gillen emphasized the importance of ensuring that GNEB’s work is focused on what is valuable to the President. DFO Koerner reminded them of the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) that were developed with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The goal was to create a more direct line with the Office of the President and have a dialogue between the GNEB and CEQ, starting with the Twelfth Report. Mark Joyce described the step

- wise process in more detail that would ensure GNEB reports would be useful to the President and the entire government. In response to a question from Ms. DiSirio , Mr. Joyce said there was no s ys tematic way to document or assess whether action was taken on advisory committee recommendations. This assessment is more difficult because the recommendations involve many governmental agencies and programs. Chair Ganster reminded the Board of Robert Varady’s subgroup on evaluation that worked on assessing the impact of GNEB’s recommendations. Mr. Joyce added that the GNEB has been an important force in changing EPA’s policies, even though it may take several years for the policies to be changed. Mr. Dorsey said that Congressional priorities and GNEB’s expert opinions were both important and that GNEB needs to make a better case for chosen topics. Mr. Edlund suggested allowing Mr. Clifford to review the conceptual outline of GNEB report topics. Mr. Joyce thought that CEQ would also be a good sounding board for draftsEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 21 March 13

- 14, 2007 of the reports. DFO Koerner reminded the Bo ard that although the GNEB is in partnership with Border 2012, GNEB is an independent board. Chair Ganster raised the issue of outside support for doing research and drafting report. Mr. Joyce stated that Rafael DeLeon, Director of OCEM, was committed to getting a support contract for this Board and the other EPA/OCEM advisory committees, but that the process of governmental contracting was difficult. Some short

- term support is possible. Several members made suggestions for hiring students or interns, such as through university grants and USGS contracts. DFO Koerner suggested the need for a conference call on the subject. Members agreed and several volunteered to participate: James Stefanov, Marilyn DiSirio, Rosendo Treviño, and Carl Edlund. The con ference call to review options for hiring a student to do research and write reports would be held March 27 at 2:00 p.m. EST. To focus the Board on the Eleventh Report, Chair Ganster asked them to review a list of FEMA
- declared disasters which had affect ed border counties from 1998 to the present. Chair Ganster asked members to suggest possible recommendations in the area of natural hazard disasters. Board members suggested the following:

 Bi

- national preparedness plans, including command and control is sues, personnel, communications, interoperability , and exercises  Emergency

responders cross

- border functions and problems, such as passports  Flood protection that benefits the environment.  Bi

- national wildfire and flood disaster planning  The relationship between border securit y and natural disasters, such as flooding  Formal structures and their authority to engage in bi

- national operations, such as the State Department, and structures that are needed  Mexico’s policies and actions in border disasters  Develo pment of natural hazards preparedness plans and training programs. Suggestions on research and review of plans and involvement and of other agencies, organizations, and governments in development of the report included:

 FEMA/DHS that are responsible for disaster management  Collaboration and mutual agreements or MOUs with Mexico similar to the Border Liaison Mechanism  HHS and CDC for health protection expertise and plans  Local governmental emergency response plans, problems and gaps  The 14 Sister City

agree ments on emergency responses  County

disaster preparedness plans developed after Katrina and their relationship to cross - border events. Suggestions for structuring the report included making a check lists in three parts: 1) actions that are immediatel y do able, 2) actions that are doable, but require more resources; and 3) barriers to actions. Another suggestion was to consider one or two worst case disaster scenarios, like an earthquake or hurricane, and determine what emergency responses would be require d and how well prepared and equipped responders are to handle the disasters.EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 22 March 13

- 14, 2007
Chair Ganster asked DFO Koerner to discuss a possible theme and workgroups. DFO Koerner suggested the main theme: What are the environmental effects of natural hazards and what actions are needed? She suggested three workgroups based on Board expertise as follows: 1. Air quality , water quality, land and related infrastructure issues, such as drinking water plants, sewage treatment plants, etc. 2. Wildlife and ecosy stems 3. Human health. Key issues, such as the institutional framework, and context would be part of the introduction. Mr. Stefanov offered to be involved in writing the introduction. The discussion of themes and workgroup structure and issues yielded the following:

 Combining Workgroup 2 with 1 or as a subset of 1.  Grouping b y context, mitigation and preparedness, and response and recovery
.  Focusing on disasters that would have trans

- border effects and any event within 100 miles of the border  Focusing on the unique p reparation and mitigation of natural hazards near the border  Having members with different expertise in each workgroup  In cluding drought as a natural disaster related to air quality and human diseases It was determined that combining options 2 and 3 as th e main framework so that items in option 1

- 3 would be repeated under preparedness, response and recover, and mitigation. Three workgroups were defined as context, planning and mitigation, and response and rebuilding. Members signed up for the workgroups and coordinators, as follows:  Context : James Stefanov, Coordinator, Rosario Marin, Deputy Coordinator, Rachel Poynter, Gary Gillen, Robert Varady, Sally Spener, and Christopher Brown.  Planning and Mitigation : Jennifer Montoya, Co

- Coordinator, Michael Dors ey, Co

Coordinator, Ann Marie Wolf, Susan Keith, Marilyn DiSirio, John Wood.  Response and Rebuilding : Carl Edlund, Coordinator, Stephen Niemeyer Deputy Coordinator, Gary Robinson, and Edward Elbrock. Ms. Keith was concerned about overlap with the Tenth Report in terms of disaster responses to hazmat hazards protocols, which have already been written down. Mr. Dorsey thought the natural disaster responses would be on a larger scale. Mr. Edlund offered to present a slide show to the Board on response proce dures related to Katrina and other disasters. Ms. Montoya explained that not all counties were as well

- prepared as Arizona. The focus in planning and mitigation would be on how to prevent land degradation from creating natural disasters. Commissioner Ma rin added that the issue of flood control models goes beyond emergency

response and includes endangered species and collaboration with Mexico. To explain the importance of drought and desertification as a natural disaster, Mr. Treviño offered to summari ze the findings from the United Nations Convention on Drought and send it to members. DFO Koerner said the Context Workgroup would be tasked withEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 23 March 13

- 14, 2007 determining which issues would be included. Other members could be involved in the first conference call on context to have input into included issues. DFO Koerner asked members to set dates and times for workgroup conference calls:

 Context : April 5 at 11:00 a.m. EST  Planning and Mitigation : April 3 at 12:00 noon EST  Recovery

and Rebuilding : April 10 at 3:00 p.m. EST Mr. Gillen offered to coordinate the photographs for the report and asked members to send him pictures related to their section of the report. 

### Strategic Planning (9:30 a.m.) DFO Koerner reviewed materials in the GNEB folders related to Strategic Planning, including mission, vision, goals and principles, CEQ’s SOPs, and a work plan grid. DFO Koerner would add names of the new workgroups to the work grid. Ms. Montoya suggested removing the name of Karen Chapman from the planning committe e, since she will be moving away
. Chair Ganster offered to be on the L as Cruces meeting planning group and to help with the field visit. Mr. Niemeyer shared some concerns about the GNEB mission, vision and goals statements. He asked for clarification o f the meaning of “community input.” DFO Koerner answered that this meant input from people in border communities. Mr. Niemeyer made several other suggestions for changes as follows:

 Change “enable” strategic allocation to “facilitate.”  Change “result” t o “The desired result.”  Change “retain” independent perspective to “emphasize.” DFO Koerner asked if members agreed with these changes and there were no objections, so the changes would be made. He also suggested that, under the SOP with CEQ the word “G NEB” be changed to OCEM since the final agreements were made between OCEM and CEQ. DFO Koerner asked if members agreed with these changes and there were no objections, so the changes would be made. Dr. Brown voiced a concern about the role and status of Federal members in regard to recusing themselves from signing GNEB’s advisory letters. Various Federal members replied that there were various reasons related to their agencies’ policies and procedures that caused them to recuse themselves, but that thes e were rare occasions. Letters were reviewed by Federal members on a case

- by

- case basis. After some discussion, DFO Koerner said thatEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 24 March 13

- 14, 2007 the legislation specifically calls for voting Federal Board members. She suggested further discussion of the role of Fe deral members at the next meeting. Chair Ganster suggested writing a comment letter on Border 2012, including its successes and ideas for course corrections. Dr. Brown said he was in favor of this letter and also one on BEIF funding that was suggested in the public comments on Day 1. Chair Ganster thought more study would be required to develop a statement. Ms. Montoya requested that members be provided a copy of the Border 2012 report. Mr. Niemeyer and Mr. Dorsey both stated that the Border 2012 letter should include the need for more funds. Mr. Dorsey, Dr. Brown , Ms. W

olf, and Mr. Niemeyer offered to help with the letter. A conference call to discuss the letter was set up for April 16, 2007, at 3:00 p.m. EST. The concept of a separate letter on BE IF funding was approved and Chair Ganster said a call for volunteers would be emailed to members. DFO Koerner asked what OCEM did that worked well for the GNEB in the past year and what areas need to be more effective or need more resources. Positive items mentioned included community

meetings, field trips, a higher profile for GNEB reports, and a focus on timely and variable topics. Members also noted that the Chair was able to guide the Board to consensus on issues. The DFO and the OCEM staff received r ecognition for their support and responsiveness. Chair Ganster asked members to discuss challenges for the future. Ms. Montoya would like to have a freer flow of discussion that does not depend on naming who speaks. To reduce the amount of paper, severa l members would prefer to have pre

- meeting papers emailed to them: Mr. Dorsey, Dr Varady, Ms. Wolf, Mr. Stefanov, Ms. Krebs, Mr. Olivieri, Ms. DiSirio, Ms. Poynter, and Mr. Darrach. Dr. Brown and other members were concerned about the GSA sy stem for purch asing airline tickets, which could be obtained for much less by individuals, and which would allow people to fly to more than one place on the same ticket. Several members thought the Rogers travel agency was very helpful and accommodating. After this, several housekeeping items were reviewed b y Lois W illiams, OCEM, in terms of how to account for and receive pay ments . Chair Ganster said he would like the issue of transportation in government vans to be clarified. Mr. Joyce answered that the issue was b eing studied and guidance should soon be finalized. Khanna Johnston, OCEM, informall y briefed the Board on lobb yi ng policy with Congress. The anti

- lobbying law that applies to Federal employees and contractors does not apply to GNEB members. However, u se of appropriated funds, such as for travel, does prohibit indirect lobbying, which is telling someone else to lobby a Congressional representative for a program, legislation or funds. The charters that set up the FACA committee members do not allow lobb yi ng. However, members could share findings and recommendations with Congress, because this is information

- sharing. Ms. Johnston said that she was told that the connection between financing of travel and lobbying was too remote to be a concern.EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 25 March 13

- 14, 2007 

### Rema **rks from EPA Adm**  **inistrator Stephen L. Johnson** (10:15 a.m.) Stephen L. Johnson, EPA Administrator thanked members for their willingness to serve on the Board and for their work on the excellent Tenth Report. The Report’s themes, messages, and recommendat ions were in concert with EPA’s relationship with border nations and globall y to improve the environment and security. He stated that the Inspector General had commented favorabl y on EPA’s responses to the hurricane disaster. He also said he was pleased to report that the President’s FY2008 budget had $10 million for the U.S.

- Mexico border and EPA has as additional $40 million of unobligated funds. During 2006, 22,000 more people at the border gained access to safe and clean water. Administrator Johnson closed by stating that the U.S. has one of the world’s premier environmental protection agencies. He urged the Board to provide EPA with insights in the Eleventh Report on how to handle natural disasters. 

### Board Member Report

**- Outs**  (12:30 p.m.) Ja mes Stefanov, USGS, DOI **,** reported on several developments to improve data collection and monitoring along the border as follows:

 Development of the Colonia Health Infrastructure and Platting Status Tool (CHPST) that monitors progress, set infrastructure p riorities, and measure quality of life  Cooperation between USGS, IBWC, and INEGI to build bi

- national GI S data sets for natural resources for the border region  Coordination of the bi

- national watershed delineations and hydrographic network  Integration of b i

- national and transboundary water quality

data, contaminant data, and land cover/use data to look at linkages between environmental conditions and human health issues at the border  Partnership between the zoos in San Diego and Mexico and SEMARNAT to set up a condor captive breeding facility at the request of the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico. Christopher Brown, Ph.D. New Mexico State University , reported on several topics;

 A Federal Highway

Administration grant to proceed on a border infrastructure needs ass essment, Phase 2, under the joint bi

- national transportation planning group that involves FHWA, the Mexican Secretaria de Communicación y Transporte, and 10 border states’ departments of transportation  A project with the World Wildlife Fund to do GI S mappi ng in the Paso del Norte region related to conservation  Publication of a report b y the New Mexico Journal of Science on water resource vulnerability

in the Paso del Norte region in cooperation with the Southwest Consortium on Environmental Research and Pol icy (SCERP).  A final report on another SCERP project on developing a bi

- national GIS sy stem. Sally Spener, IWBC, announced that President Bush had appointed Commissioner Marin as Commissioner of the U.S. section; he has been serving as Acting Commissione r. The Nogales International Wastewater Treatment Plant is being upgraded. However, theEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 26 March 13

- 14, 2007 international outfall interceptor that convey s sewage to the treatment plant is not being upgraded due to lack of funding. Jennifer Montoya, WWF, reported that river restoration will receive $2.5 million of Governor Richardson’s capital budget. This is the start of a statewide initiative to integrate all of the state agencies that are involved in river management on the Rio Grande. Carl Edlund, Region 6, EPA , handed out a one - page report that included an upcoming Border 2012 National Coordinators Meeting on May 22
- 24, 2007; an update of the U.S.

- Mexico Border 2012 video; a conference on scrap tire and used oil management; BEIF funding in the quarterl y management repo rt; and several other items. He also said that the EPA office had briefed Senator Feinstein’s office. DFO Koerner asked for a cop y of the quarterl y report to email to members. Rosendo Treviño, National Resources Conservation Service, USDA , distributed fac t sheets on USDA activities. The fact sheets included the reauthorization of the Farm Bill and information on an MOU between the USDA Secretary , and the Mexican Agriculture and Economic Secretary

to reestablish the U.S.

- Mexico Consultative Committee on Agriculture (CCA). Mr. Treviño is a member of the CCA Board. Mr. Treviño added that the NRCS has received large increases in funds for conservation since 1995. State conservationists focus their assistance on shared watersheds with Mexico. The U. S. and Mexican conservationists will stage a bi

- national earth day celebration in Alpine, Texas on May 23. Lana Corrales, CDC, reported for Marilyn DiSirio , who had to leave for the airport, on CDC’s National Center for Environmental Health and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry

activities. An environmental health workgroup involving CDC, Mexico, USEPA, and Border 2012 health task forces is working to reach consensus on border

- wide priorities for FY2007 to promote health indicator projects on traf fic and air pollution, dengue fever, and gastrointestinal illness in Baja, California, related to new water s ys tems. She is also involved with the Border Indicators Task Force to improve environmental health and the Border Health Commission on lead poisoni ng. Stephen Niemeyer, P.E., Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, distributed a written report that included the Border 2012 meeting in Austin on February 27, 2007; a Water Work Table Meeting at the Border Governor’s Conference on February 21, 2007; a TCEQ and University

of Texas conference on scrap tires and used

- oil on February 26 to March 1, 2007; and a 2007 Border to Border Transportation Conference on April 17

- 19, 2007. Mr. Niemeyer pointed out that Deputy Secretary

of State Buddy

Garcia was ap pointed and was approved b y the Texas Senate as the new TCEQ Commissioner. Rachel Poynter, Office of Mexico Affairs, Department of State , described her role in covering U.S.

- Mexico environment and health issues and working with U.S. agencies such as EPA, DOI, USGS, and Fish and Wildlife. Three issues of interest to the Board included a communiqué related to migratory bird habitat conservation, a NEPA assessment of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative and land requirements; and a meeting with all of the border governors. DHS, FEMA, and DOS are working on more rapid movement ofEPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 27 March 13

- 14, 2007 resources across the border. A plan would be developed similar to the one developed for the Canadian border. Michael Dorsey, San Diego County Department of Environmental Health , discussed the emergency

management institute at the University of Baja California in Tijuana that trains first responders. In October, 2005, a settlement with Equilon for $10.5 million enabled them to purchase emergency

response equipment for the City o f Tijuana Fire Department. Recently , Mr. Dorsey was appointed Chief of the Community Health Division in charge of the Vector Control Program, oversight of landfills and burn sites, occupational health, and radiological health. Susan Keith, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality , reported that ADEQ received a Border 2012 grant to clean up migrant waste and develop a stakeholder process for future clean

- ups. ADEQ is studyingair quality in the border sister cities and is working with IBWC on planning for the international Nogales wastewater plant. Dr. Brown asked about the new RFID chip in passports that would allow more rapid border crossings. Ms. Poynter responded that the technology was being developed and undergoing a NEPA assessment of the effec t on wait times at the border. Mr. Olivieri said that his passport is screened whenever he crosses into the U.S. from Mexico, but the technology for scanning passports for U.S. exits to Mexico was not yet in place. 

### Wrap Up and Adjournment (1:20 p .m.) DFO Koerner set up a conference call to plan for the July 24
- 25 GNEB meeting in Brownsville, Texas, for Monday , April 2, 2007 at 12 noon EST. Mr. Joyce congratulated the Board on their work in developing the recommendations for the Tenth Report that received favorable comments from Administrator Johnson and other agency officials. The meeting was adjourned at **1:30 p.m.**EPA Good Neighbor Environmental Adviso ry Board 28 March 13

- 14, 2007 

### Appendix Mary Brandt, U.S. IBWC Don Coelho, U.S. National Park Service Eric Cook, Border Programs, GSA Adam Domby, Congressman Girjalva’s Office Luis Fernandez, EPA Mike Feullo, BNA Carey Fitzmaurice, EPA Laura Gomez, OIA, EPA Mark Harvey, Office of Law Enforcement, Security, and Emergency Management, National Park Service, DOI Khanna Johnston, OCEM, AO, EPA Ellie Kanipe, OSW, EPA Emily Kilcrease, Office of International Affairs, DOI Deborah Kopsick, RPI, ORIA, EPA Teresa Kuklinski, EPA Corinne Lackner, Defenders of Wildlife Todd Owen, CBP, DHS Jo nathan Putnam, National Park Service Toni Rousey, OCEM, AO, EPA Russell Smith, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative Sue Stendebach, EPA Tim Sullivan, U.S. Border Patrol Tyanne Stewart, AEIO, EPA Kim Thorsen, Director, Office of Law Enforcement, Security, and Emergency Management, DOI