Comanagement of Federal Contaminated Sites

1
Co-management of Federal Contaminated Sites

• Margaret Kenny Environment Canada
• Blair James Treasury Board Secretariat
• October 8, 2004

2
Federal Contaminated Sitesthe problem . . .

• Identified as an issue in the 1980s
• Subject of frequent OAG (CESD) reviews
• 1995 no legislative framework nature and
  extent of contamination not defined need to
  improve results measurement and reporting
• 1996 no central inventory no comprehensive
  policy no central management plans or timetable
  no central leadership financial liability not
  recognized
• 1998 no central leadership no inventory no
  accurate picture of contingent and actual
  liabilities

3
The problem . . .

• 2002 CESD report criticized
• Lack of information about scope of problem
• Number of contaminated sites
• Related health and ecological risks
• Cost of remediation
• Ranking in order of risk
• Lack of stable, long-term funding
• Lack of central leadership and action plan to
  deal with high risk sites

4
The problem . . .

• Close to 4,000 federal contaminated sites
• 14 custodian departments/agencies
• In all provinces and territories
• Estimated liability over 3 billion
• Contamination results from government operations
• DND practice ranges, fuel tank leakage, heavy
  metals
• Some sites are inherited
• Bankrupt mine sites North of 60

5
Challenges

• Accountability
• Real property policy development is
  responsibility of Treasury Board Secretariat
• Management of federal real property, including
  contaminated sites, is the responsibility of
  custodian departments
• Resources
• Inherited problems
• No source of long-term funding
• Governance
• No collaboration departments acted independently

6
Challenges (2)

• Information gaps
• Numbers, location and condition of contaminated
  sites
• Nature and effectiveness of management/corrective
  strategies being used
• No centralized science expertise
• Human health risks Health Canada
• Ecological risks Environment Canada
• Risks to fish and fish habitat Fisheries and
  Oceans

7
First steps

• 1989 Canadian Council of Ministers of
  Environment 5-year 250M strategy to address
  high-risk orphan sites
• 1995 establishment of Contaminated Sites
  Management Working Group (CSMWG)
• 15 departments and agencies
• 1999 - A Federal Approach to Contaminated Sites
• Standardized vocabulary
• Definition of 10 steps provided consistent way of
  describing progress in assessing suspected sites
  and managing identified contamination

8
Groundwork for a federal contaminated sites
strategy

• 1999 Approval in principal of Contaminated
  Sites Management Framework
• Federal Contaminated Sites and Solid Waste
  Inventory Policy (2000)
• 30 million/two years to assess and report
  information on suspected sites to centralized
  TBS-managed data base
• Federal Contaminated Sites Inventory (FCSI
  publicly available, July 2002)
• TB policies on Management of Federal Contaminated
  Sites and Accounting for Federal Contaminated
  Sites (2002)

9
Building a federal contaminated sites strategy

• Budget 2003 committed 175 M / two years
• Federal Contaminated Sites Accelerated Action
  Plan
• Intended to accelerate development and
  implementation of strategies to manage
  contaminated sites posing highest risk to human
  health and the environment
• Joint Environment Canada / Treasury Board
  Secretariat submission to Cabinet
• Program designed in collaboration with custodial
  departments and expert departments (Health,
  Fisheries and Oceans, Environment) through CSMWG

10
Building a government-wide strategy

• Governance
• Creation of ADM Steering Committee to oversee and
  ratify decisions of CSMWG
• FCSAAP Secretariat (EC) provides
  support/coordination
• CSMWG collaboration to develop project selection
  criteria to ensure focus on highest-risk sites
• NCS Class 1(Action required)
• Over 1 million
• Demonstrated high risk to human health or the
  environment
• Expert departments consulted with CSMWG members
  to develop human health and ecological risk
  assessment tools

11
Building a government-wide strategy (2)

• Accountability
• Program-wide Results-based Management
  Accountability Framework is umbrella for
  departments RMAFs
• Performance is measured and reported using the
  same criteria for all departments
• All departments contribute to FCSAAP Annual Report

12
The FCSAAP process

• Departments submitted projects for consideration
• Projects reviewed against selection criteria and
  scores were assigned by departments and expert
  departments based on risks and other factors
• Funding options were developed on the basis of
  scores assigned through project review process
• Funding options were then vetted by CSMWG and
  ratified by the ADM Steering Committee before
  seeking TB approval

13
Where we are today

• To date, 57 remediation and care and maintenance
  projects funded18 in 2003/04 and 55 in 2004-05
• 7.9 M over two years for assessment projects in
  12 departments
• Projects distributed across Canada
• Funding at risk of lapsing is reallocated
• within a department or
• to another department with high-priority
  requirements
• Now preparing 2003/04 annual report
• Departments completing 2004/05 construction season

14
What weve accomplished

• Governance ?
• Accountability ?
• Resources ?
• Science expertise coordination ?
• Data base transparency ?

15
Why is FCSAAP successful?

• Grass-roots origin
• TBS and EC are relatively neutral departments
• Vested interest supports broad mandates
• mandates are complementary
• Agreed-on science-based criteria
• Cost-shared program

16
Next steps for FSCAAP

• Budget 2004 commitment of 3.5B to address
  federal contaminated sites liability
• Review and expand the program to build on the
  base established under FCSAAP
• Investigate opportunities for linkages
• Enhancement of Federal Contaminated Sites
  Inventory underway to facilitate liability,
  progress and site status reporting