| | Environmental Compliance Assurance: A Review of International |
| | 0,41 | | MB | Best Practices |
| | 148 | | stron |
| | 4364 | | ID | Executive Resource Group |
| | 2001 | | rok |
| | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| | 1 INTRODUCTION 2 |
| | Purpose 2 |
| | Background 2 |
| | Research perspective and methodology 2 |
| | Scope 3 |
| | 2 INTEGRATED COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE 5 |
| | Introduction 5 |
| | Integrated compliance: an emerging trend 5 |
| | Enforcement and abatement 8 |
| | Cooperative agreements 10 |
| | Compliance assistance 14 |
| | 3 JURISDICTIONAL OVERVIEW 16 |
| | European Union 16 |
| | United States 17 |
| | Canada 20 |
| | 4 CASE PROFILES 24 |
| | Project XL US Environmental Protection Agency 1995 24 |
| | Declaration on the Implementation of Environmental Policy in the Chemical IndustryThe |
| | Netherlands 1993 27 |
| | Green Permits Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 1997 29 |
| | Environmental Results Program Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection 1997 31 |
| | Accelerated Reduction/Elimination of Toxics (ARET) Canada 1994 36 |
| | 5 SUMMARY 39 |
| | 6 APPENDICES |
| | APPENDIX A: NEW DIRECTIONS GROUP 41 |
| | APPENDIX B: EMERGING BEST PRACTICES IN ABATEMENT 42 |
| | AND ENFORCEMENT |
| | I. Abatement – Approvals 44 |
| | 1) Project XL Comprehensive Approvals – US EPA 44 |
| | 2) Tiered Approvals System for Emissions – Alberta 50 |
| | 3) Environmental Results Program – Massachusetts 51 |
| | 4) Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act 54 |
| | II. Abatement – Performance Measures and Reporting 58 |
| | 1) Secretary’s Quarterly Performance Report 58 |
| | 2) Critical Trends Assessment Program 60 |
| | III. Abatement and Enforcement 61 |
| | 1) Computer Assisted Inspections 60 |
| | 2) Training – Commission for Environmental Cooperation 70 |
| | 3) Guides – GAO Enforcement Guide 72 |
| | 4) Priority-Setting – Regional Office of US EPA 74 |
| | 5) Colorado Compliance Study – Colorado 76 |
| | APPENDIX C: EMERGING BEST PRACTICES IN 78 |
| | COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS |
| | Introduction 78 |
| | I. Unilateral Industry Commitments 79 |
| | 1) Responsible Care – 42 Countries 79 |
| | 2) ISO 14001/ EMS – Worldwide 81 |
| | II. Public Disclosure and Recognition Schemes 83 |
| | 1) ARET - Canada 83 |
| | 2) 33/50 – US EPA 85 |
| | 3) P4 – Ontario 86 |
| | 4) National Environmental Performance Track – US EPA 89 |
| | 5) Governor’s Awards – New York 92 |
| | 6) Keidanren – Japan 94 |
| | III. Negotiated Agreements and Covenants 96 |
| | 1) Environ Policy in the Chemical Industry – Netherlands 96 |
| | 2) Project XL – US EPA 98 |
| | 3) Sustainable Industry Program – US EPA 100 |
| | 4) Green Permits – Oregon 102 |
| | 5) Silver and Gold Track Program – New Jersey 105 |
| | 6) Environmental Cooperation Pilot Program – Wisconsin 107 |
| | 7) Performance Plus+ Program – Ontario 109 |
| | 8) Hamilton Autobody Repair Partnerships – Ontario 111 |
| | 9) Innovative Regulatory Approaches – Alberta 113 |
| | APPENDIX D: EMERGING BEST PRACTICES IN COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE |
| | Introduction 115 |
| | 1) United States Environmental Protection Agency 116 |
| | 2) Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 119 |
| | 3) Australia Department of Environ and Heritage/EPA 123 |
| | 4) California Environ Protection Agency 126 |
| | 5) Florida Department of Environmental Protection 127 |
| | 6) New York Department of Environmental Conservation 129 |
| | 7) Environment Canada 132 |
| | 8) Michigan Department of Environmental Quality 134 |
| | REFERENCE 136 |