by Ms. Janice King Jensen

In my remarks, I want to place persistent organic pollutants (POPs) in historical and societal perspective within the United States and in the North American region and talk about why and how our region is shifting away from reliance upon them. However, our regional work is only part of the picture. Each country in the North American region has taken domestic regulatory action on some or all of these substances.

With the exception of PCBs, dioxins, and furans, most substances on the UNEP list were once widely used in the North America as pesticides. A review of the history of pesticides shows a number of phases. Using insecticides as an example, before World War II, there was heavy reliance on organochlorines. Initially, DDT seemed remarkably benign. It was long lasting and not acutely (or immediately) toxic to humans. Clothes were dipped in DDT as insect repellent. In the U.S., unforeseen consequences of DDT began to gradually emerge. Residues accumulated in animal, fish, and human fat tissues. DDTs benefit of persistence began to be seen as its drawback. Because it was persistent (and hydrophobic), it built up in aquatic food chains and thereafter in fish-eating birds. In 1955, evidence of aquatic bioaccumulation emerged when a bird species, the western grebe, began to die off around a lake treated with DDT. There was a decline in the population of America’s national symbol, the bald eagle, and other predator bird species that may well have been caused by the buildup of DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides.

After the War and through the 60's, the organophosphates and carbamates predominated. In the early 80's, synthetic pyrethroids were introduced. In the late 80's and early 90's we strongly entered into the biological pesticides era. We are now in the reduced risk pesticides area including biochemicals with a non-toxic mode of action and genetically-engineered plants and micro-organisms.

The meaning of risk has taken on greater implications over time. In the 50's and 60's we were merely trying to keep people from falling down dead as a result of pesticide use. In the 70's, with the cancellation of DDT, risk was heavily focused on carcinogenic potential. Later, the implications of nervous system disorders were at the forefront. With the synthetic pyrethroids, restrictions due to aquatic exposure concerns were levied. Now we have entered an era of focus that includes risk to pre- and neo-natal infants, aggregate exposures, common mechanisms of toxicity, and endocrine disruptors. Accordingly, agriculture in our region has steadily shifted toward less persistent and bioaccumulative toxic chemicals and toward alternative pest control measures, where possible.

The North American region faces significant challenges in protecting the health of its citizens and its natural resources from environmental hazards. International cooperation is a key element in our ability to achieve this regional mission. In today’s world, since pollution does not honor national boundaries, overcoming these challenges requires the cooperation of other countries. Some examples:

Over half of the U.S. population lives in the 19 States that form our borders with Mexico and Canada. Nowhere are the benefits of EPA’s international programs more apparent than along our common borders with Mexico and Canada and in the Arctic and Wider Caribbean Region.

EPA’s cooperative programs with Mexico, along with the Agency’s role in negotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), have led to specific environmental gains in both countries. The construction of wastewater treatment facilities in Mexico is helping solve decades-old problems affecting human health and the environment in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. Joint air pollution efforts under the 1983 Border Environment Agreement will help reduce respiratory and other health problems in U.S. cities along the border, as well as their Mexican "sister" cities (e.g., Ciudad Juarez, Tijuana). Coordinated enforcement efforts are reducing illegal waste dumping and other pollution on both sides of the border. "Border XXI" is a new five-year program for protecting health and environment along the border with Mexico. The goal of Border XXI is to make border communities safe and cleaner for the more than 10 million people who live there. Objectives of the Border XXI plan include:

Long-standing cooperation with Canada has resulted in corresponding environmental gains along our northern border. Benefitting from the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and other cooperative agreements, mercury levels in fish in Lakes Michigan, Huron, and Erie have dropped by more than 75 percent since 1970. Phosphorous loadings into Lake Erie decreased by more than 50 percent over the same time period, improving water quality and raising fish stocks.

EPA and Environment Canada are working closely with public and private interests on both sides of the border to eliminate health and environmental risks from persistent organic pollutants in the Great Lakes. In April of this year, Canada and the United States signed the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy ("Binational Strategy"). The goal of this strategy is the virtual elimination of persistent toxic substances from the Great Lakes Basin, particularly those substances which bioaccumulate. Table 1 below lists the substances of concern for the Binational Strategy. Level I substances are the critical pollutants for priority action through voluntary, regulatory, or incentive-based programs that phase out the use, generation, or release of these chemicals in a cost-effective manner. Level II substances are targeted for voluntary actions to achieve significant reductions in the use and release into the environment.

U.S. and Canadian efforts to achieve the goals of the U.S.-Canada Air Quality Agreement resulted in reductions of sulfate wet deposition over eastern North America by over 20 percent of 1979 levels. US and Canada are cooperating to achieve shared goals for the Puget Sound-Straits of Georgia Basin eco-region. Their top four priorities are minimizing habitat loss, protecting marine plants and animals, minimizing introduction of non-native species, and creating marine protected areas. Joint contingency planning with Mexico and Canada is helping prevent and ensure appropriate response capabilities for chemical accidents or other hazardous spills along inland borders.

Finally, the U.S. and its NAFTA partners have determined that some transboundary issues related to Mexico and Canada are better addressed on a regional scale through the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), which was established under the North American Free Trade Agreement side agreement. Table 2 below lists the task forces established by the three parties to develop North American Regional Actions Plans (NARAPs) for PCBs, DDT/chlordane, mercury, and a process for identifying additional candidate substances. They also are negotiating procedures to notify and mitigate transboundary environmental impacts. The CEC has facilitated cooperation among the North American nations on other issues such as environmental enforcement, development of a North American pollutant release inventory, regional greenhouse gas emissions trading, and regional implementation of global environmental agreements.

The criteria and a process for identifying persistent and toxic substances for future NARAPs are summarized below:

CEC Task Force on Criteria

draft as of : June 1997

* Expert judgement is needed for the screening process.

** There is a debate within the scientific community about the use of these criteria and the values proposed.

In summary, I will conclude my comments by stating that many of the persistent chemicals we used for several decades are far less benign that we originally believed. With the upcoming UNEP POPs treaty, we have an opportunity for global action to remove some of these harmful chemicals from the environment. However, we must remain focused and patient. The tasks ahead for us to accomplish this will not be easy. We need to work together in harmony and maintain a vision of our shared goal.