Revised Draft Annex Implementing Agreements July-August 2005 Office of the Great Lakes Department of Environmental Quality

2005 Revised Draft Agreements

A ban on diversions with limited exceptions.

Common decision-making standards for new or increased water use.

State decision making for in-basin water uses.

Water conservation commitment.

Recognition of existing rights and treaties

History behind the Revised Drafts

Great Lakes Charter 1985 Good-faith agreement between Great Lakes Governors and Premiers Framework for protecting Great Lakes Basin waters Establishment of water management principles

Section 1109 WRDA Section 1109(d) of WRDA (42 U.S.C.§1962D-20) - No water shall be diverted or exported from any portion of the Great Lakes within the United States, or from any tributary within the United States of any of the Great Lakes, for use outside the Great Lakes basin unless such diversion is approved by the Governor of each of the Great Lakes States

WRDA 2000 Amendment Congress declares its “purpose and policy…to encourage the Great Lakes States, in consultation with the Provinces of Ontario and Quebec, to develop and implement a mechanism that provides a common conservation standard embodying the principles of water conservation and resource improvement for making decisions concerning the Withdrawal and use of water from the Great Lakes Basin;”

Great Lakes Charter Annex June 18, 2001 Good-faith agreement between Governors and Premiers The Annex would: Include Ontario and Quebec Include in-basin consumptive uses Include ground water

CGLG Water Management Working Group Advisory Committee, Resource Group and Observers Public participation Annex Process

July 2004 Drafts July 19, 2004 Draft Agreements Released 10,000 basin wide comments received 700+ Comments from MI  4 Meetings, 1 Hearing, Numerous Briefings

Post Public Comment Water Management Working Group  Advisory Group Convened Nov 2004  Working Group Meetings Nov-June Tribal Input  Jurisdictional Meetings  Basin-wide Meeting January 2005  MI discussions under MI Water Accord

2005 Revised Drafts Released Drafts Released by Governors/Premiers Not Consensus Documents 60 Day Public Comment Period Ends August 29

2005 Revised Drafts – Key Improvements A ban on diversions with limited exceptions. Common decision-making standards for new or increased water use proposals. Decision making process for in-basin water uses will take place at the State level Strengthened commitments to water conservation. Recognition of existing rights and treaties.

Diversions 2004 Draft Allowed all diversions that met standard Communities that straddle basin divide considered in basin 2005 Draft Prohibits diversions w/limited exceptions:  Communities in straddling counties could bring a proposal forward  Communities that straddle basin divide considered in basin  Intra Basin Diversions

Voting On Diversions 2004 Draft Projects under 1 MGD not subject to veto/vote Projects over 1 MGD subject to vote and single state veto 2005 Draft All projects subject to veto/vote Only proposals from communities in straddling counties considered

Michigan Great Lake Watersheds

Intra Basin Diversions 2004 Draft All intrabasin projects over 1MGD subject to unanimous vote/veto Under 1MGD jurisdiction  Improvement required on all 2005 Draft Projects under 5 MGD, review by jurisdiction only-notice to others Intrabasin projects over 5 MGD consumptive use subject to unanimous vote/veto  No improvement required

Intra Basin Diversions 2004 Draft Huron/Michigan considered one hydrologic unit Connecting Channels considered part of both Lakes 2005 Draft Huron/Michigan considered one hydrologic unit Connecting Channels considered part of both Lakes

Lake Erie Basin

Lake Superior Divide

In Basin Use Over 5 MGD (Consumptive Use) 2004 Draft Projects over 5 MGD subject to regional review and compact vote- 3 states could block Improvement required 2005 Draft Projects over 5 MGD subject to regional review, no compact vote.  Jurisdiction decision No improvement required

In Basin Use Less than 5 MGD (Consumptive Use) 2004 Draft Programs to manage withdrawals >100,000GD required in 10 Years 2005 Draft Programs to manage withdrawals >100,000GD required in 10 Years

Decision Making Standard 2004 Draft Preventing/minimizing water loss through return flow Environmentally sound/economically feasible water conservation measures No significant adverse individual or cumulative impacts to the quantity or quality of water/water dependent natural resources Improvement to the waters/water dependent natural resources of the basin Compliance with applicable state, provincial, federal and international laws and treaties 2005 Draft Preventing/minimizing water loss through return flow Environmentally sound/economically feasible water conservation measures No significant adverse individual or cumulative impacts to the quantity or quality of water/water dependent natural resources Compliance with applicable municipal, state, provincial, federal and international laws and treaties Improvement not required

Conservation 2004 Draft2005 Draft Conservation Plan for proposals that trigger Regional Review Conservation measures for other proposed withdrawals No reasonable alternative including conservation of existing water supplies Jurisdictional Programs subject to annual reporting, regional review Proposals – conservation measures; conservation of existing water supplies Programs – strengthened commitments to conservation, restoration, ecosystem integrity; develop program within 5 years of agreements (best management practices, performance standards, monitoring, research etc.); subject to annual reporting, regional review

Improvement 2004 Draft Required for all diversion proposals Required for all consumptive use proposals > 5MGD 2005 Draft Not required as part of any proposals Jurisdiction conservation program will lead to overall improvement

Bottled Water 2004 Draft Water in containers >20 L a diversion Water packaged in basin in containers <20 L considered consumptive use 2005 Draft Water in containers >20 L a diversion Water packaged in basin in containers <20 considered consumptive use

Averaging Period 2004 Draft 120 Day Averaging Period 2005 Draft 90 Day Averaging Period

Next Steps Jurisdictional Hearings/Meetings MI Meetings/Hearing Sault St. Marie, Grand Haven, Port Huron, Detroit, Lansing Review/Revise Drafts based on comments received (Sep-Oct) Documents Signed by end of 2005

Comment Process Comment period ends August 29 Written Comments: Office of the Great Lakes P.O. Box th Floor Constitution Hall Lansing, MI

Comment Process Council of Great Lakes Governors Written comments should be sent to: David Naftzger Executive Director Council of Great Lakes Governors 35 E. Wacker Drive, Suite 1850 Chicago, Illinois Comments may also be submitted via to:

For More Information : Office of the Great Lakes (517)