[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

GLIN==> Request for Proposal to Assess the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy





> Request for Proposal to Assess the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy
> 
> The International Joint Commission has asked its Great Lakes Water Quality
> Board to assess progress made under the Canada - United States Great Lakes
> Binational Toxics Strategy and the contribution of the Strategy toward
> achievement of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement's virtual
> elimination goal.  To carry out this charge, the Board convened a Progress
> Review Work Group.  The Work Group has developed a proposed scope of work,
> appended in both WordPerfect (.wpd) and MSWord (.doc) format.  The Work
> Group requires the services of a consultant to develop the details,
> including the up-front rigour necessary to ensure the desired output, and
> to carry out the assessment.
> 
> On behalf of the Work Group, we request your proposal for the design and
> conduct of the assessment, conforming with the Work Group's proposed scope
> of work.  We would appreciate receiving your proposal by close of
> business, 5:00 PM EST, on Friday, January 5, 2001.  If you have any
> questions or require additional documentation, please do not hesitate to
> contact us.  Thank you.
> 
> On behalf of the Work Group,
> 
> Dr. M.P. Bratzel, Jr.
> Great Lakes Regional Office
> International Joint Commission
> 100 Ouellette Avenue - 8th Floor
> Windsor, Ontario  N9A 6T3
> Canada
> Tel:  519.257.6701
> Fax:  519.257.6740
> e-mail:  bratzelm@windsor.ijc.org
> 
> * * * * *
> 
> PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
> 
> REVIEW OF PROGRESS
> UNDER THE
> GREAT LAKES BINATIONAL TOXICS STRATEGY
> AND THE
> CONTRIBUTION OF THE STRATEGY
> TOWARD ACHIEVEMENT OF VIRTUAL ELIMINATION
> 
> 
> Introduction and Background
> 
> The 1978 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement committed Canada and the
> United States to virtually eliminate inputs of persistent toxic substances
> to the Great Lakes system in order to protect human health and to ensure
> the continued health and productivity of living aquatic resources and
> their human use.  On  April 7, 1997, Environment Canada and the United
> States Environmental Protection Agency signed the Great Lakes Binational
> Toxics Strategy.  The purpose of the Strategy
> 
> 	"is to set forth a collaborative process by which Environment Canada
> and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with other
> federal Departments and agencies, Great Lakes states, the Province of
> Ontario, Tribes, and First Nations, will work in cooperation with their
> public and private partners toward the goal of virtual elimination of
> persistent toxic substances resulting from human activity, particularly
> those which bioaccumulate, from the Great Lakes Basin, so as to protect
> and ensure the health and integrity of the Great Lakes ecosystem. ...  An
> underlying tenet of this Strategy is that governments cannot by their
> actions alone achieve the goal of virtual elimination.  This Strategy
> challenges all sectors of society to participate and cooperate to ensure
> success."
> 
> In December 1999, the International Joint Commission asked its Great Lakes
> Water Quality Board to assess progress made under the Strategy and the
> contribution of the Strategy toward achievement of the Agreement's virtual
> elimination goal.  To carry out this charge, the Board convened a Progress
> Review Work Group.  The Work Group has developed the following proposed
> scope of work.
> 
> Scope of Review
> 
> The review will be structured around:
> 
> -	The Strategy's purpose - "to set forth a collaborative process."
> -	The Strategy's four steps (full text in Appendix):
> 	1.	Information gathering.
> 	2.	Analysis of current regulations, initiatives and programs
> which manage or control substances.
> 	3.	Identification of cost effective options to achieve further
> reductions.
> 	4.	Implementation of actions to work toward the goal of virtual
> elimination.
> -	The Strategy's specific challenges.
> 
> Through the Strategy's substance-specific work groups, a considerable
> amount of information has been compiled, especially for Steps 1, 2 and 3,
> and Step 4 is actively under way.  The information is available in various
> reports, minutes, and other documents, most of which are posted on the
> Strategy's web site (http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/bns/).
> 
> The review recognizes that the Strategy is a work in progress, especially
> in regard to Step 4.  Specifically, the review will:
> 
> 1.	Assess how well the Strategy has been (or is being) implemented, in
> terms of whether each challenge has been (or will be) met.  The assessment
> will consider how well each of the Strategy's four steps has been (or is
> being) done and how useful each step is.
> 2.	Confirm whether quantitative information is available to
> substantiate the assessment of whether each challenge has been (or will
> be) met and, if not, identify gaps.
> 3.	Identify additional challenges the Strategy could undertake, for
> instance, to fill gaps in the panoply of virtual elimination initiatives.
> 4.	Provide advice to improve Strategy implementation and further
> contribute to achievement of the Agreement's virtual elimination goal.
> To assist in designing the review, the Parties have provided a
> chronological narrative that summarizes what has been done, both in terms
> of the Strategy overall and for each of its work groups.  In developing
> details of the review, two additional reports will be consulted:
> 
> -	The report, "Applicability of Voluntary, Beyond Compliance Programs
> to the Virtual Elimination Strategy," submitted to the Water Quality Board
> in 1997.  Available on the web at
> http://www.ijc.org/boards/wqb/beyond.html
> -	The report, "The IJC and the 21st Century," 1997.  Available on the
> web at http://www.ijc.org/comm/21ste.htm
> 
> Details
> 
> The Work Group proposes contact with a cross-section of the Great Lakes
> community and beyond, including but not limited to representatives of
> federal, state / provincial, and municipal governments;  business /
> industry;  environmental non-government organizations;  and labour.  For
> purposes of this proposal, the consultant should assume that 20 key
> informants will be contacted.  This number may be increased or decreased
> in the contract itself, depending on the proposed work plan and other
> factors.  The consultant may wish to consider program evaluation
> methodologies, possibly including interviews, surveys, or similar methods.
> 
> The consultant will review appropriate, publicly available Strategy
> records and data, and prepare a short "context piece" that describes
> current best estimates and relative amounts of contaminants entering the
> Great Lakes from sources within and outside the basin.  With guidance from
> the Work Group, the consultant will develop a series of in-depth questions
> which will be posed to informants.  The questions will be designed to
> provide information on:
> 
> -	Progress to implement the Strategy and achieve each of the specific
> challenges.
> -	The Strategy's contribution toward achievement of the Agreement's
> virtual elimination goal.
> 
> The "context piece" and the questions will be designed to elicit not only
> factual information, but also to glean the personal views of  respondees
> in regard to how and why they reached their opinions.  The answers
> provided and information gained will allow the Work Group to ascertain:
> 
> -	Whether the persistent toxic substances issue and the need for
> virtual elimination has been effectively conveyed to the right audience.
> -	Whether key people and key organizations / sectors are aware of the
> Strategy and, if so, to what degree.
> -	Whether specific programs have been developed in direct response to
> the Strategy and, if so, which ones.
> -	The human and financial resources specifically devoted to the
> Strategy.
> -	How the Strategy relates to other initiatives, such as the PBT
> (persistent bioaccumulative toxics) program.
> -	Whether pre-existing programs have been stimulated, re-directed, or
> made more effective because of the Strategy.
> -	The factual basis for establishment of baselines against which to
> track progress.
> -	The factual basis for decisions about which contaminant sources,
> pathways, and reservoirs to address through the Strategy.
> -	Whether the Strategy has appropriately addressed source categories
> of most importance.
> -	Whether the Strategy is contributing to the fulfilment of specific
> source-reduction and -elimination requirements in the Agreement, including
> but not limited to Annex 14 (contaminated sediment), Annex 15 (atmospheric
> sources), and Annex 16 (groundwater).
> -	Whether the Strategy has successfully brought people together and
> constructively engaged them in regard to achieving its goals and, if so,
> to what degree, i.e. the efficacy of the Strategy's approach.
> -	Whether the Strategy has contributed to a climate of mutual trust
> and collaboration.
> -	Whether the Strategy has created opportunities for regulatory and /
> or voluntary actions.
> -	Any change in attitudes or behaviour by individuals and / or
> organizations in response to the Strategy.
> -	Inducements for involvement and action, either individually, by
> sector, through associations, or other means.
> -	Attitudes towards impediments - regulatory and otherwise.
> -	Attitudes toward implementation of pollution prevention actions.
> -	Whether the Strategy has made a difference toward virtual
> elimination and, if so, how and how much.
> 
> Output
> 
> The output of this activity will be assessment and advice to the Water
> Quality Board, specifically:
> 
> -	An assessment of progress under the Strategy, including the extent
> to which specific actions taken to date have contributed to the topics
> noted below.
> -	An assessment of the contribution of the Strategy toward achievement
> of the Agreement's virtual elimination goal.
> -	Advice and guidance as to the relative priorities within the
> Strategy and the specific actions that may be appropriate to make future
> Strategy activities more effective, especially in regard to the Strategy's
> Step 4, and to advance the Strategy toward its stated purpose.
> -	Advice and guidance to enhance the Strategy's contribution toward
> achievement of virtual elimination overall.
> 
> The assessment, advice, and guidance may encompass the following topics,
> among others:
> 
> -	Communication and outreach, opportunities, inducements, and actions
> for achieving more extensive and more timely reduction and elimination of
> contaminants.
> -	Identification and quantification of all contaminant sources,
> pathways, and reservoirs.
> -	Programs and measures for making more timely progress toward the
> Agreement's virtual elimination goal for sources within and outside the
> basin.
> -	Baseline(s) or other measures to quantitatively track progress for
> sources within and outside the basin.
> -	Explication of the legislative, regulatory, and program framework.
> 
> Note:  Some of the advice may be beyond the stated purpose of the
> Strategy.  For example, program gaps may be identified, and the advice
> provided may be in terms of the role(s) that the Strategy could play in
> filling those gaps.  The advice may also be in terms of measures that
> could be taken through mechanisms and initiatives other than the Strategy.
> 
> Contractor Requirement
> 
> The Work Group requires the services of a consultant to develop the
> details, including the survey instrument(s), suggesting appropriate
> alternatives, and to carry out the agreed-upon activities.  The consultant
> should provide the up-front rigour necessary to ensure the desired content
> of the output.
> 
> Funds Available
> 
> The budget estimate for this project is approximately $12,000 US.
> 
> Schedule
> 
> Proposals for conduct of the above-described work are hereby solicited
> from potential consultants.  The proposals will outline how the tasks can
> be undertaken, and a schedule, to ensure that advice and guidance are
> developed in a timely manner.  Proposals will be accepted until close of
> business on Friday, January 5, 2001.  The Work Group will review the
> proposals and make a decision to award a contract no later than January
> 19, 2001.  Work will commence as soon as possible thereafter.  The Work
> Group is obligated to provide advice to Water Quality Board prior to the
> Commission's next biennial forum, to be held in Montreal on September
> 14-15, 2001.  Therefore, the consultant should plan to complete contact
> work by April 6, submit a draft report to the Work Group by April 27, and
> complete a final report by July 13, 2001.
> 
> For Further Information
> 
> Please contact:
> 
> 	M.P. Bratzel, Jr.
> 	Great Lakes Regional Office
> 	International Joint Commission
> 	100 Ouellette Avenue - 8th Floor
> 	Windsor, Ontario  N9A 6T3
> 	Tel:  519.257.6701
> 	Fax:  519.257.6740
> 	e-mail:  bratzelm@windsor.ijc.org
> 
> APPENDIX
> ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK
> FOR THE
> GREAT LAKES BINATIONAL TOXICS STRATEGY
> 
> [Environment Canada] and the [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency], in
> cooperation with their partners, will use a four-step process to work
> toward virtual elimination.
> 
> 1.  Information gathering
> 	Identify to the extent feasible, the full range of sources, both
> point and non-point, within and outside the Basin which release the
> selected substances, by economic sector, and examine which sector(s) may
> be contributing to the presence of the substance in the Basin.  Within
> each source, identify why and how the substance is used or released, e.g.,
> used as a product or released as a byproduct.  This step may include
> examining the entire life cycle of the substance, from initial decision to
> use through eventual disposal.  Also, specific characteristics of a
> substance such as whether it is naturally occurring, or whether its
> release results from human use, will be considered.  Information gaps and
> uncertainties as to sources, multi-media loadings and associated impacts
> of specific substances will be identified and actions recommended to
> address them.
> 
> 2.  Analyze current regulations, initiatives and programs which manage or
> control substances
> 	Assess how existing laws, regulations and programs influence the
> presence of these substances in the Basin, and their long-range transport
> across states, provinces, regions and international borders.  Identify the
> gaps in these regulations, programs and initiatives that offer opportunity
> for the most effective and appropriate reductions of these substances.
> 
> 3.  Identify cost-effective options to achieve further reductions
> 	Identify options that may offer opportunities for new or modified
> measures, including emission trading schemes, pollution prevention, or
> other alternative approaches, which may speed up the pace or increase the
> level of reductions, taking into account cost effectiveness.
> 
> 4.  Implement actions to work toward the goal of virtual elimination
> 	Using cost-effective measures, recommend and implement actions that
> work toward the goal of virtual elimination, consistent with the approach
> outlined in this Strategy.
> 
> 
> 
> Prepared:  November 22, 2000
> 
> 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
glin-announce is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network (GLIN):
http://www.great-lakes.net
To subscribe: http://www.glin.net/forms/glin-announce_form.html
To post a message: http://www.glin.net/forms/glin-announce_post.html
To search the archive: http://www.glin.net/lists/glin-announce/
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *