Table of Contents | Previous | Next

Canada - United States Air Quality Agreement

2002 Progress Report

SECTION VI  Second Five-year Review and Assessment of the Canada-United States Air Quality Agreement

INTRODUCTION

Article X, Review and Assessment of the Canada-United States Air Quality Agreement is intended to ensure that the Parties periodically review and assess the Agreement to determine whether it is working well and is "a practical and effective instrument to address shared concerns regarding transboundary air pollution." This second review will address the issues raised in 1996 when the first review was undertaken, outline where progress has been made, and indicate where challenges continue to exist.

ISSUES RAISED IN THE 1996 REVIEW

There are three components to this issue. First is the lack of an evolving environmental objective in the acid rain annexes of the Air Quality Agreement against which to measure progress. In Canada, the goal of the acidification program is to prevent damage and assess recovery to the sensitive ecosystems by achieving the critical loads for sulphate in aquatic ecosystems. While the United States does not use sulphate or acidification critical loads to guide its acid rain program but uses emission reductions and a cap to achieve its goals, sulphate deposition levels are closely followed and compared to ecosystem damage to assess recovery. The Parties agree that tracking progress made by emission reductions toward a goal of reducing and, when possible, preventing damage to the environment is important and should be a routine part of the work undertaken under the Air Quality Agreement.

The second part of this issue is the recognition that nitrogen emissions are an important part of the acidification issue, in addition to being a smog precursor. The development of nitrogen critical loads would be an important and useful tool through which to guide assessments of how much greater NO_x emission reductions should be to address both acidification and smog. This is particularly important since the scientific research in the past decade has shown clearly a strong link between sulphate and nitrate deposition. To prevent acidification damage, the extent of the reduction necessary from nitrogen oxide emissions may be greater than originally thought. The Parties agree that the role of nitrogen oxide emissions in both acidification and smog issues is important and that revised ecological goals for acidification, such as nitrogen critical loads, should be developed as soon as possible to guide assessments of transboundary issues.

The third component of the issue is the recognition that more reductions of emissions of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide are required to prevent damage to areas in Canada and the United States that are moderately and highly sensitive to acidification. The Parties agree that further reductions of emissions of the pollutants that cause acidification should be an important goal for future bilateral cooperation on transboundary air pollution under the Agreement, including in any future negotiations of an annex to address transboundary particulate matter. Joint efforts to analyze the impacts of current commitments to reduce sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide pollutants should be conducted to answer the question of how further emission reductions would impact the environment from acidification.

The first Five-Year Review recognized the value of expanding the Agreement to address other issues of concern. Concrete steps were taken to respond to this issue on the occasion of the meeting between the Canadian prime minister and U.S. president in April 1997 when the Canadian minister of the Environment and the U.S. administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency signed a commitment to develop a Joint Plan of Action to address transboundary air pollution. The Joint Plan of Action set in motion cooperative analyses and work plans on transboundary ozone and fine inhalable particles. The development of the joint transboundary ozone report, its conclusion that a bilateral negotiation to address ground-level ozone would benefit air quality and health in both Canada and the United States, and the subsequent Canada–U.S. negotiation of the Ozone Annex in 2000 fulfill the first part of the 1997 Joint Plan of Action. The second part to address particulate matter (PM) in air in an effort to reduce transboundary particle levels is underway with a joint report of the transboundary PM issue being developed by scientists in both countries. The Parties agree to review the conclusions regarding the transboundary PM issue and to make a decision regarding a recommendation to governments in 2004 when the Ozone Annex is revisited, as the terms of the Annex provide.

With respect to addressing air toxics under the Air Quality Agreement, the Air Quality Committee decided in 1996 at its annual meeting that overlap and duplication among various existing bilateral mechanisms dealing with air pollution should be avoided. Transboundary air toxics are being addressed by Canada and the United States jointly through bilateral, trilateral, and multilateral agreements and arrangements. The Parties agree that they will keep abreast of and share information on developments on toxic pollutants of concern with a view toward discussions within the context of the Air Quality Agreement in the future if such discussions would be effective and not duplicative.

Canada's commitment in the Air Quality Agreement is to develop and implement for the Canadian sources that could cause significant transboundary air pollution the means to prevent significant air quality deterioration and to protect visibility in a way that is as effective as the U.S. programs for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and protection of visibility in parks and wilderness areas. There are two key elements in the U.S. programs that are important with respect to transboundary air quality issues. First is the principle in the PSD and visibility programs that air quality should be protected not only where air quality standards are exceeded but also where air quality standards are already met. Second is the principle that both new industrial sources and the modifications made to existing sources should be built as cleanly as possible to prevent pollution.

Canadian governments, in June 2000, agreed to Canada-wide Standards (CWS) for ozone and particle air quality, including the principles to "keep clean areas clean" and to "continuously improve" air quality. As Canadian jurisdictions develop their plans and programs to meet the ozone and PM Canada-wide Standards by 2010, they will build in the measures to protect against deterioration of air quality. In addition, through the programs being developed to achieve the PM Canada-wide Standard, visibility will be improved across the country, including in areas where there is transboundary flow.

The Parties now agree that Canada's implementation of the Canada-wide Standard for PM and Ozone will likely address further air quality deterioration and may have benefits for visibility protection. However, the United States continues to be concerned that prevention of air quality deterioration and the protection of visibility are required programs in the United States while Canada does not have comparable requirements.

Although Canada and the United States have differences in laws and regulations on assessment and mitigation, the Parties have been successful in setting this different interpretation to the side and working together to address issues where there is a transboundary pollution concern. In 1998, at the annual Air Quality Committee meeting, Guidelines for Implementing the Consultation Process under Article XI of the United States–Canada Air Quality Agreement were approved. The guidelines provide for informal consultation between the Parties and are an effective process for implementing the consultation commitment laid out in Article XI of the Agreement. The immediate concerns leading to the development of the guidelines were a desire to discuss concerns expressed by U.S. residents regarding possible transboundary air pollution in the Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, area in relation to the Algoma steel plant and in the Estevan area in Saskatchewan in relation to the Boundary Dam Power Station. Following the guidance in the guidelines, important working level cooperation and relationships have been developed that are not only addressing the original concerns expressed but also helping to address future issues that may arise under the information consultation provision of the Air Quality Agreement.

In addition to the informal bilateral intergovernmental consultations that are continuing successfully with respect to the Algoma steel plant and the Boundary Dam Power Station, a third informal consultation on the Conners Creek Power Plant in Detroit, Michigan, has been successfully concluded. In this case, Canadian residents expressed concerns about possible transboundary pollution resulting from the startup of a coal-fired power plant. The requirement for the power plant to refuel with natural gas was considered a positive conclusion by Canadians concerned about the plant's operations.

The Parties agree to continue to meet the consultation commitment under the Agreement using as guidance the informal guidelines established in 1998.

Annex 2, which covers scientific and technical activities and economic research, falls under this article. The three issues that the science focuses on are acid rain, ground-level ozone, and particulate matter.

Acid deposition is seen as a success story as sulphate levels fall in most of the sensitive areas. In view of this, ongoing scientific work focuses on the role of nitrogen, the monitoring of acid deposition, and of lake and river chemistry. Some work is also being done to assess whether sulphate and nitrogen deposition loads will be reduced sufficiently to protect sensitive ecosystems after emission control programs are implemented in both countries. Until recently, most of the work has been carried out in parallel rather than in a truly cooperative mode. Efforts are now underway to enhance cooperation.

Since the 1996 review, the focus of the science program has shifted to ground- level ozone with emphasis almost entirely on health effects. In contrast to the acid rain issue, the science of ground-level ozone and particulate matter is focusing almost entirely on health effects. Both the United States and Canada have pioneered epidemiological studies based on large data bases that have shown an association between mortality/morbidity and air pollution levels with no apparent threshold. In addition to the health work, some forest effects ozone research is underway.

The Ozone Annex to the Air Quality Agreement and the amendments to the Annex II to address ozone science builds upon existing bilateral reporting under the Agreement and provides for each country a commitment to complete monitoring and assessment activities to track progress toward the achievement of each country's ozone air quality standards, to track facility-specific emission levels, to evaluate transboundary flow, and to monitor health and air quality along the border within 500 km.

The Ozone Annex committed Canada and the United States to explore market mechanisms and, in particular, emissions trading. Emissions cap and trade programs for NO_x and SO₂ emissions in the United States have proven to be an efficient and cost-effective method of achieving emission reductions to address acidification and ground-level ozone air quality concerns. There have been bilateral discussions of emissions trading, including a workshop in April 2001, when details were shared on U.S. trading programs. The Parties are developing a joint project designed to analyze and explore required infrastructure for a cross-border NO_x emissions cap and trade and to evaluate the impact of emissions trading on public health and the environment.

There is joint scientific work underway to understand the transboundary nature of particulate matter in order to frame the issue for the Air Quality Committee in a report to be issued by the end of 2003 that will be the focus of decision-making on whether to develop a PM annex to the Air Quality Agreement.

Exchange of information between the Parties has been enhanced through the new commitments under the Ozone Annex. The Ozone Annex requires, for the first time in 2002 and thereafter, specific ozone, ambient nitrogen oxide (NO_x), ambient volatile organic compound (VOC) concentration, and trend data will be reported in the biennial Canada–U.S. Progress Report for all relevant sites within 500 km of the border between Canada and the United States. To prepare the reports, common protocols and reporting formats are being defined.

Furthermore, the Ozone Annex requires by the 2004 biennial Canada–U.S. Progress Report and, thereafter, both Canada and the United States to begin reporting annual and ozone season and five-year trend data on nitrogen oxide and volatile organic compound emissions for the key source sectors in the transboundary ozone region or Pollutant Emission Management Area (PEMA) defined in the Annex. In addition, the Parties have broadened their coordination and exchange of data relating to acid deposition measurements.

In 2001, Canada and the United States established a cooperative agreement to characterize and improve U.S.–Canadian atmospheric deposition measurements and to enhance the exchange, accessibility, and analysis of data within the two countries. Under a cooperative agreement initiated this year, the two governments are planning to establish a common, cooperative, Canadian–U.S. deposition data-base, analysis, and Web-based mapping capability that will include data from the NADP, CASTNet, and AIRMoN networks as well as Canadian federal and provincial acid rain monitoring networks.

In response to the Five-Year review comment, the Air Quality Committee decided that the progress reports should be shortened and attempts should be made to make them more "accessible" to the lay public. The 1998 and 2000 reports were shorter and less detailed to respond to the committee's direction. Despite their smaller size, however, they are technical in nature. At the same time, the academic community has found the lengthy 1996 progress report useful as course material. The Parties agree that while a biennial compliance report is technical in nature, such a report could be accompanied by a much shorter summary that can highlight the successes of the bilateral cooperation under the agreement.

At the 1999 annual meeting of the Air Quality Committee, the role and responsibilities of the International Joint Commission were discussed. The impetus for the discussion was a letter from the IJC in which a proposal was made that the role of the IJC be expanded. The Air Quality Committee agreed that the IJC should continue in its current role of soliciting and synthesizing public comments on the progress reports.

After some consideration, the Parties do not see strong value in involving a third party in the review and assessment of the Agreement at this time. The Ozone Annex negotiation demonstrates the ability of the Agreement to function and adapt to transboundary pollution issues of concern to the Parties.

The Parties are satisfied that development and use of the informal Guidelines for Implementing the Consultation Process under Article XI of the United States-Canada Air Quality Agreement provide an appropriate opportunity for addressing and potentially resolving concerns regarding transboundary pollution.

NEW TRANSBOUNDARY AIR ISSUES

The Parties are each developing domestic programs through which to implement their PM air quality standards for particles. Subcommittee 2 is currently developing a description of the transboundary PM issue for the Air Quality Committee. This characterization will provide information to the Air Quality Committee from Subcommittee 1 on the benefits of developing bilateral management options to address the contribution of transboundary flows to the achievement of the air quality standards in the two countries. If the Air Quality Committee agrees that a bilateral approach to the transboundary PM issue is warranted, the committee may recommend to both governments that a PM annex be negotiated under the Air Quality Agreement.

The Georgia Basin-Puget Sound region in British Columbia and Washington State is currently undertaking to describe its transboundary air pollution issue sufficiently to enable an assessment of the value of a bilateral management approach in the area. Under the Ozone Annex, the opportunity to add a new region or Pollutant Emission Management Area exists. In 2004, when the Ozone Annex is revisited, the consensus achieved through the current discussion will be brought to the table for review and assessment.

Protection of visibility continues to be a requirement in the United States, while it is not considered an issue of concern in Canada. However, the Parties now agree that Canada's implementation of the Canada-wide Standard for PM and Ozone will likely address further air quality deterioration and may have benefits for visibility protection.

However, the United States continues to be concerned that prevention of the deterioration of air quality and the protection of visibility are required programs in the United States while Canada does not have comparable requirements.

The Air Quality Committee may be interested in mercury-related analyses as it relates to emissions from power plant generation and multipollutant efforts in both countries to address emissions from this sector.

CONCLUSION

Over the last five years, Canada and the United States continued to successfully fulfill the obligations set forth in the Air Quality Agreement. Implementation of each country's acid rain control program continues to be a particularly notable achievement of the Agreement. However, both countries recognize that control of transboundary pollution still has not occurred to the extent necessary to fully protect the environment, particularly in highly sensitive areas. To address this shortcoming, the Parties agree that 1) progress in tracking emissions reductions must be continued, and the United States continues to be particularly interested in making facility-specific emissions data publicly accessible; 2) revised ecological goals must be developed, particularly to assess the role of nitrogen oxide emissions in transboundary pollution issues; and 3) further reductions of the pollutants causing acidification should be a goal for future bilateral cooperation on transboundary pollution under the Agreement.

The first Five-Year Review recognized the value of expanding the Agreement to cover other issues of concern. Since the last review, the Parties successfully negotiated an Ozone Annex setting summertime nitrogen oxide emission reduction targets, or "caps," to address transboundary ozone pollution in the eastern border regions of each country. Efforts to address particulate matter to reduce transboundary PM transport are underway, and a joint scientific report on transboundary PM issues is being developed. The Parties agree to review the conclusions regarding transboundary PM issues and to make a decision regarding a recommendation to governments in 2004 when the Ozone Annex is revisited as the terms of the Annex provide.

In the first Five-Year Review, the Parties expressed disagreement over two main obligations, and both are areas in which progress has been made over the intervening five years. First, the Parties disagreed in 1996 over the prevention of air quality deterioration and the protection of visibility. The Parties now agree that Canada's implementation of the Canada-wide Standard for PM and Ozone will likely address further air quality deterioration and may have benefits for the protection of visibility. However, the United States continues to be concerned that prevention of air quality deterioration and protection of visibility are required programs in the United States while Canada does not have comparable requirements. Second, the Parties disagreed in 1996 regarding certain aspects of assessment and mitigation. The Parties continue to interpret differently the commitment on assessment and mitigation as a result of differences in laws and regulations. However, they have successfully set aside this difference and worked together to address transboundary pollution concerns. One result of this progress has been the approval of informal Guidelines for Implementing the Consultation Process under Article XI of the United States-Canada Air Quality Agreement, facilitating a practical and effective process for implementing the consultation commitment laid out in Article XI of the Agreement.