THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakea United exprasses its outrage that the Grand Canal project could even be seriously considered by Canadian private interest groups and public officials and opposes any study or further considerations of the proposal.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT GREAT LAKES UNITED COOPERATE WITH LOCAL GROUPS TO ACTIVELY OPPOSE THESE SITES AND ALL OTHER SITES WHICH MAY BE PROPOSED WITHIN THE BASIN; AND

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, THAT GREAT LAKES UNITED ACTIVELY PROMOTE AND SUSTAIN PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAMS DIRECTED TOWARD BROAD-BASED PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON SAFE OPTIONS FOR DISPOSAL OF LOW AND HIGH-LEVEL WASTE; AND

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United board members and staff appear with representatives of local groups to present this resolution.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
1) That Great Lakes United endorses the recommendations, condusions and substance of the IJC's "Seventh Biennial Report on Great Lakes Water Quality,"
2) That Great Lakes United endorses the proposal to create a multi-organization, Great Lakes Basin campaign to sunset chlorine~ontainingin dustrial feedstocks; that it seeks active and equal participation in this effort from both professional environmental groups and grassroots, community-based groups; and that it will endeavor to provide as much leadership and coordination to this effort as is appropriate and acceptable to other participants in the campaign.
3) That the policy framework that will govern Great Lakes United's participation in a multi-organization campaign to sunset chlorinecontaining industrial feedstocks includes the recommendations, conclusions and substance of: the IJC's fifth, Sixth and Seventh Biennial Reports; the "Chlorine Case Study" submitted to the IJC Virtual Elimination Task Force; and the Citizens' Presentation to the IJC Seventh Biennial Meeting.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United set up a transboundary working group in conjunction with the Zero Discharge Alliance to develop a strategy for implementation of the air toxics provisions of the Clean Air Act and similar Canadian clean air initiatives and strategies for applying the policy of zero discharge to air toxics in accordance with Annex 15 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
 

THEREFORE BE II' RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United will work closely with affiliated labor organizations, the bi-national labor movement at large, and other environmental organlzations in the U.S. and Canada, through the GLU LaborIEnvironment Task Force, to assure that the goals and interests of affected workers as well as those of the binational environmental community are considered to the maximum extent possible; AND

THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Great Lakes United will campaign for, educate on, fully support, and if necessary, initiate, the inclusion of income protection language in the Clean Water Act; AND

TEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the GLU LabourIEnvironment Task Force will seek to work with the labour movement in Canada on an ongoing basis to explore and investigate legislative mechanisms for the inclusion of income protection language in Canadian clean water legislation, as well, such as MlSA and others which may arise in the future.

BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United encourages individua1s and its member organizations to contact U.S. Senators and Representatives from the Great Lakes region with their views on working aggressively for comprehensive controls on sources of toxic air pollution to protect the Great Lakes from further degradation.

Great Lakes Representatives and Senators should be asked to communicate with the leaders of the appropriate Congressional committees their views on support for the criteria outlined in the previously listed 1989 Great Lakes United "Resolution on Toxic Air Pollution in the Great Lakes Basin."

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Great Lakes United acknowledges the leadership of former Michigan Governor Blanchard in writing an Executive Order that requires regulations and programs to be reviewed for their consistency with the GLWQA; and that other Great Lakes states and provinces be urged to make similar commitments to review regulations and programs prior to adoption to ensure their consistency with the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that regulations with uniform numerical criteria common to both federal jurisdictions be established to determine the extent of contamination in sediment and therefore the options for disposal and treatment of that sediment; AND

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that such criteria not only measure concentrations of contaminants in sediment, but that they also take into account the cumulative effects of multiple contaminant(s), the organic content and sediment size distribution, the movement (partitioning) of contaminants between sediment and water column, and chronic as well as acute effects on biota (bioaccummulation); AND

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that citizens be included in the decision-making process for developing said criteria as well as in reviewing all drafts of regulations including the final criteria.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United contact the Canadian Minister of the Environment and Members of Parliament to request the continued funding from the Wildlife Protection Fund for Pierre Beland's critical research and matching funds he sought from the appropriate U.S. Federal Agency t o recognize their binational responsibility to protect this endangered species.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United supports an Aquafund concept in the United States and Canada to fund the im lementation of research programs, prioritization and mapping of toxic hot spots, 2 emonstration cleanup projects, and ermanent cleanup activities for contaminated sediment areas in our waterways; AND

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that such a concept or program, established in each country, must address the coordination of air, water, and land use issues on a watershed basis; AND

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that time is of the essence in developing practical funding mechanisms for such programs and that such mechanisms be devised by the two federal governments in consultation with Great Lakes United, its member organizations, and other interested citizens' groups; AND

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that no such funding mechanism be approved that includes any scheme that could be interpreted as a "license to pollute" by direct dischargers; AND

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that positive incentives to prevent future pollution and to encourage waste minimization and source reduction be built into any legislation or regulation; AND

Et Cetera

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United publicly circulate the followin criteria for reviewing RAPs to the IJC, the government agencies responsible for preparing the plans, member groups and others interested and involved with RAPs:

1. Was the public participation process used in the preparation of the remedial action plan adequate? If not, what additional actions are necessary?
2. Was the public involved in the identification of impaired uses and problems?
3. Was the public involved in choosing preferred remedial strategies?
4. How will the public be involved in ensuring the implementation of the remedial action plan?
5. How will the public be involved in decisions made regarding the completion of remedial actions and the decision that all beneficial uses have been restored?
6. Were the public's concerns and recommendations adequately responded to?
7. Are the remediation objectives clear and consistent with the general and specific objectives of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement?
8. Have the geographic boundaries of the area of concern been appropriately and clearly defined?
9. In cases where the Area of Concern crosses an international border, has an international RAP been prepared?
10. Have impaired uses (both human and non-human) been identified?
11. Have the problems causing the impaired uses been described well? Is the data adequate to do this?
12. If the data is not adequate, what additional studies are necessary? Who will do them? When? Funding?
13. Have the contributions of each point and non-point source been assessed and compared to each other to determine the relative source loading?
14. Have the adverse effects on all ecosystem components been identified?
15. Have all appropriate remedial strategies been described?
16. Have the remedial strate ies been described completely, including any negative effects that could result from their implementation?
17. Has the choice for preferred remedial strategies been based on ecological Found? (i .e. the preferred strategies shoul be effective but not further disrupt the ecosystem).
18. Will the proposed remedial strategies be effective in achieving the objectives of the remedial action plan? Are the proposed remedial strategies consistent with the general and specific objectives of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement?
19. Is there a schedule for implementation and completion of remedial measures?
20. Have the agencies responsible for remediation been identified and accepted responsibility?
21. Are there adequate funds and staff resources set aside for implementation of the remedial strategies?
22. Is there an adequate monitoring process outlined to measure the effectiveness of the remedial strategies and to ensure that remediation is completed?
23. Is there an adequate process set up to measure any adverse effects of the remedial strategies?

FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United believes that all of the above criteria should be answered affirmatively for RAPs to be judged complete; AND,

FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United request the Water Quality Board of the IJC to establish and publicize clear listing and delisting criteria for Areas of Concern; AND

FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United advises that otwithstanding complex environmental problems, RAPs be constructed and review with a bias for immediate action; AND

FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United recommends that implementation of RAPs be part of the annual agreements between the states and US EPA to implement the Clean Water Act and between Ontario and Canada to implement the Canada Ontario Agreement.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Great Lakee United at its Annual Meeting in Mackinaw City on May 16-18, 1986, commends Governor lllenchard and the Michigan Water Remources Commission for proposing to classify Michigan's waters of the Great Lakes as "outstanding national resource waters" for purposes'of U.S. EPA's water quality standards regulations;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United calls upon Governor Blanchard and the Michigan Water Resources Commission to eliminate the exception in proposed rule 1098(3) which would allow new or increased pollutant diacharges into the connecting channels or tributaries of the Great Lakes within Michigan's boundaries even if these discharges adversely affect Great Lakes water quality;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United calls upon the Michigan Water Resourcee Commission immediately to promulgate proposed rule 1098 designating Michigan's waters of the Great Lakes as "outstanding national resource waters," mended as suggested herein, as a revision to Michigan's water quality standards;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Great Lakes United calls upon the other Great Lakes states immediately to revise their water quality standards to classify the open waters of the Great Lakes located within their boundaries as "outstanding national resource waters" for purposes of the U.S. BPA's water quality standard regulations.