Common use of Risk Informed Management Approach Clause in Contracts

Risk Informed Management Approach. Table 1 provides a high-level summary of the four classes, including key commitments at each class, and some considerations for classification. To improve the transparency and consistency of classification, the appendices of each Bilateral Water Management Agreement may contain more specific criteria and representative conditions that correspond to each class. However, the Parties recognize the need to retain flexibility in the future, as it will be impossible to identify every possible consideration. In general, as described in Table 1, water bodies with no or very low development/use are class 1. At class 1, it is expected that the Jurisdictional Water Management practices of each Party will be sufficient to meet transboundary commitments. Other than reporting, no Bilateral Water Management actions are required in this class. As warranted by increased development/use and other factors, Transboundary Waters will be moved to higher classes, where Bilateral Water Management actions are identified to complement Jurisdictional Water Management practices. Some level of current or planned development/use is necessary for a water body to move from class 1 to class 2, but there is no single threshold of development/use that causes a water body to move to class 2 or 3. To move from a class 1 to 2 or from class 2 to 3, the level of development/use is considered along with other factors to classify water bodies using a risk-informed approach. Other factors beyond development levels that may influence the assignment of a water body to class 2 or class 3 include, but are not limited to:  Natural or other anthropogenic stressors or vulnerabilities;  Sensitive water or ecosystem uses (e.g., traditional uses, drinking waters, heritage sites or parks);  Use conflicts or controversy;  Water quality and quantity conditions or trends; and  Aquatic Ecosystem (e.g., biological, human health or traditional use) conditions or trends. In other words, a water body that is stressed or vulnerable (e.g., low winter flows, etc.), supports sensitive uses (e.g., traditional use, drinking water, etc.), experiences water use conflicts (e.g., conflicts among users or public controversy about water or ecosystem conditions), and/or demonstrates negative conditions or trends in water quality, water quantity or Aquatic Ecosystem Indicators, may be moved up in class at a lower level of development/use than a water body that does not. The intensity of Bilateral Water Management will increase as required to support continued achievement of RIM goals and Transboundary Objectives. At class 2, a Learning Plan tailored to the needs of the water body will be developed. Learning Plans will be developed using an integrated approach, and will address relevant water quality, water quantity, Groundwater and biological considerations. As part of the Learning Plan, Triggers may be established to support learning, to prepare for setting and assessing the achievement of Transboundary Objectives, and to proactively address any negative trends. Triggers are defined in the Agreement as specific conditions defined by the Parties that will require a Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management response. More specifically, in the context of RIM, a Trigger is a pre-defined early warning of change in typical or extreme conditions that results in confirmation of the change and Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management to address the change/trend. Multiple Triggers can be set to invoke additional actions as necessary (e.g., degrading conditions) and Triggers can be set for class 2 and 3 Transboundary Waters. At class 2, Triggers may be established as part of the Learning Plans to initiate various kinds of management oversight or action (e.g., set a Transboundary Objective). At class 3, Transboundary Objectives will be established based on detailed, site-specific analysis. Transboundary Objectives establish conditions that the responsible Party or Parties commit to meet. If the BMC determines that Transboundary Objectives are not met, the water body will be designated class 4, at which point the responsible Party or Parties will identify and implement action as in section 4.3 j) through n) of the Agreement, with the goal of returning the water body to class 3. The factors that will guide an assessment under 4.3 k) will be determined at the BMC.

Risk Informed Management Approach. Table 1 provides a high-level summary of the four classes, including key commitments at each class, and some considerations for classification. To improve the transparency and consistency of classification, the appendices of each Bilateral Water Management Agreement may contain more specific criteria and representative conditions that correspond to each class. However, the Parties recognize the need to retain flexibility in the future, as it will be impossible to identify every possible consideration. In general, as described in Table 1, water bodies with no or very low development/use are class 1. At class 1, it is expected that the Jurisdictional Water Management practices of each Party will be sufficient to meet transboundary commitments. Other than reporting, no Bilateral Water Management actions are required in this class. As warranted by increased development/use and other factors, Transboundary Waters will be moved to higher classes, where Bilateral Water Management actions are identified to complement Jurisdictional Water Management practices. Some level of current or planned development/use is necessary for a water body to move from class 1 to class 2, but there is no single threshold of development/use that causes a water body to move to class 2 or 3. To move from a class 1 to 2 or from class 2 to 3, the level of development/use is considered along with other factors to classify water bodies using a risk-informed approach. Other factors beyond development levels that may influence the assignment of a water body to class 2 or class 3 include, but are not limited to:  Natural or other anthropogenic stressors or vulnerabilities;  Sensitive water or ecosystem uses (e.g., traditional uses, drinking waters, heritage sites or parks);  Use conflicts or controversy;  Water quality and quantity conditions or trends; and  Aquatic Ecosystem (e.g., biological, human health or traditional use) conditions or trends. In other words, a water body that is stressed or vulnerable (e.g., low winter flows, etc.), supports sensitive uses (e.g., traditional use, drinking water, etc.), experiences water use conflicts (e.g., conflicts among users or public controversy about water or ecosystem conditions), and/or demonstrates negative conditions or trends in water quality, water quantity or Aquatic Ecosystem Indicators, may be moved up in class at a lower level of development/use than a water body that does not. The intensity of Bilateral Water Management will increase as required to support continued achievement of RIM goals and Transboundary Objectives. At class 2, a Learning Plan tailored to the needs of the water body will be developed. Learning Plans will be developed using an integrated approach, and will address relevant water quality, water quantity, Groundwater and biological considerations. As part of the Learning Plan, Triggers may be established to support learning, to prepare for setting and assessing the achievement of Transboundary Objectives, and to proactively address any negative trends. Triggers are defined in the Agreement as specific conditions defined by the Parties that will require a Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management response. More specifically, in the context of RIM, a Trigger is a pre-defined early warning of change in typical or extreme conditions that results in confirmation of the change and Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management to address the change/trend. Multiple Triggers can be set to invoke additional actions as necessary (e.g., degrading conditions) and Triggers can be set for class 2 and 3 Transboundary Waters. At class 2, Triggers may be established as part of the Learning Plans to initiate various kinds of management oversight or action (e.g., set a Transboundary Objective). At class 3, Transboundary Objectives will be established based on detailed, site-specific analysis. Transboundary Objectives establish conditions that the responsible Party or Parties commit to meet. If the BMC determines that Transboundary Objectives are not met, the water body will be designated class 4, at which point the responsible Party or Parties will identify and implement action as in section 4.3 j) through n) of the Agreement, with the goal of returning the water body to class 3. The factors that will guide an assessment under 4.3 k) will be determined at the BMC.

Risk Informed Management Approach. Table 1 provides a high-level summary of the four classes, including key commitments at each class, and some considerations for classification. To improve the transparency and consistency of classification, the appendices of each Bilateral Water Management Agreement may contain more specific criteria and representative conditions that correspond to each class. However, the Parties recognize the need to retain flexibility in the future, as it will be impossible to identify every possible consideration. In general, as described in Table 1, water bodies with no or very low development/use are class 1. At class 1, it is expected that the Jurisdictional Water Management practices of each Party will be sufficient to meet transboundary commitments. Other than reporting, no Bilateral Water Management actions are required in this class. As warranted by increased development/use and other factors, Transboundary Waters will be moved to higher classes, where Bilateral Water Management actions are identified to complement Jurisdictional Water Management practices. Some level of current or planned development/use is necessary for a water body to move from class 1 to class 2, but there is no single threshold of development/use that causes a water body to move to class 2 or 3. To move from a class 1 to 2 or from class 2 to 3, the level of development/use is considered along with other factors to classify water bodies using a risk-informed approach. Other factors beyond development levels that may influence the assignment of a water body to class 2 or class 3 include, but are not limited to:  Natural or other anthropogenic stressors or vulnerabilities;  Sensitive water or ecosystem uses (e.g., traditional uses, drinking waters, heritage sites or parks);  Use conflicts or controversy;  Water quality and quantity conditions or trends; and  Aquatic Ecosystem (e.g., biological, human health or traditional use) conditions or trends. In other words, a water body that is stressed or vulnerable (e.g., low winter flows, etc.), supports sensitive uses (e.g., traditional use, drinking water, etc.), experiences water use conflicts (e.g., conflicts among users or public controversy about water or ecosystem conditions), and/or demonstrates negative conditions or trends in water quality, water quantity or Aquatic Ecosystem Indicators, may be moved up in class at a lower level of development/use than a water body that does not. The intensity of Bilateral Water Management will increase as required to support continued achievement of RIM goals and Transboundary Objectives. At class 2, a Learning Plan tailored to the needs of the water body will be developed. Learning Plans will be developed using an integrated approach, and will address relevant water quality, water quantity, Groundwater and biological considerations. As part of the Learning Plan, Triggers may be established to support learning, to prepare for setting and assessing the achievement of Transboundary Objectives, and to proactively address any negative trends. Triggers are defined in the Agreement as specific conditions defined by the Parties that will require a Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management response. More specifically, in the context of RIM, a Trigger is a pre-defined early warning of change in typical or extreme conditions that results in confirmation of the change and Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management to address the change/trend. Multiple Triggers can be set to invoke additional actions as necessary (e.g.necessary, for example, if there are degrading conditions) , and Triggers can be set for class 2 and 3 Transboundary Waters. At class 2, Triggers may be established as part of the Learning Plans to initiate various kinds of management oversight or action (e.g., set a Transboundary Objective). At class 3, Transboundary Objectives will be established based on detailed, site-specific analysis. Transboundary Objectives establish conditions that the responsible Party or Parties commit to meet. If the BMC determines that Transboundary Objectives are not met, the water body will be designated class 4, at which point the responsible Party or Parties will identify and implement action as in section 4.3 j) through n) of the Agreement, with the goal of returning the water body to class 3. The factors that will guide an assessment under 4.3 k) will be determined at the BMC.

Risk Informed Management Approach. Table 1 provides a high-level summary of the four classes, including key commitments at each class, and some considerations for classification. To improve the transparency and consistency of classification, the appendices of each Bilateral Water Management Agreement may contain more specific criteria and representative conditions that correspond to each class. However, the Parties recognize the need to retain flexibility in the future, as it will be impossible to identify every possible consideration. In general, as described in Table 1, water bodies with no or very low development/use are class 1. At class 1, it is expected that the Jurisdictional Water Management practices of each Party will be sufficient to meet transboundary commitments. Other than reporting, no Bilateral Water Management actions are required in this class. As warranted by increased development/use and other factors, Transboundary Waters will be moved to higher classes, where Bilateral Water Management actions are identified to complement Jurisdictional Water Management practices. Some level of current or planned development/use is necessary for a water body to move from class 1 to class 2, but there is no single threshold of development/use that causes a water body to move to class 2 or 3. To move from a class 1 to 2 or from class 2 to 3, the level of development/use is considered along with other factors to classify water bodies using a risk-informed approach. Other factors beyond development levels that may influence the assignment of a water body to class 2 or class 3 include, but are not limited to:  • Natural or other anthropogenic stressors or vulnerabilities;  • Sensitive water or ecosystem uses (e.g., traditional uses, drinking waters, heritage sites or parks);  • Use conflicts or controversy;  • Water quality and quantity conditions or trends; and  • Aquatic Ecosystem (e.g., biological, human health or traditional use) conditions or trends. In other words, a water body that is stressed or vulnerable (e.g., low winter flows, etc.), supports sensitive uses (e.g., traditional use, drinking water, etc.), experiences water use conflicts (e.g., conflicts among users or public controversy about water or ecosystem conditions), and/or demonstrates negative conditions or trends in water quality, water quantity or Aquatic Ecosystem Indicators, may be moved up in class at a lower level of development/use than a water body that does not. The intensity of Bilateral Water Management will increase as required to support continued achievement of RIM goals and Transboundary Objectives. At class 2, a Learning Plan tailored to the needs of the water body will be developed. Learning Plans will be developed using an integrated approach, and will address relevant water quality, water quantity, Groundwater and biological considerations. As part of the Learning Plan, Triggers may be established to support learning, to prepare for setting and assessing the achievement of Transboundary Objectives, and to proactively address any negative trends. Triggers are defined in the Agreement as specific conditions defined by the Parties that will require a Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management response. More specifically, in the context of RIM, a Trigger is a pre-defined early warning of change in typical or extreme conditions that results in confirmation of the change and Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management to address the change/trend. Multiple Triggers can be set to invoke additional actions as necessary (e.g., degrading conditions) and Triggers can be set for class 2 and 3 Transboundary Waters. At class 2, Triggers may be established as part of the Learning Plans to initiate various kinds of management oversight or action (e.g., set a Transboundary Objective). At class 3, Transboundary Objectives will be established based on detailed, site-specific analysis. Transboundary Objectives establish conditions that the responsible Party or Parties commit to meet. If the BMC determines that Transboundary Objectives are not met, the water body will be designated class 4, at which point the responsible Party or Parties will identify and implement action as in section 4.3 j) through n) of the Agreement, with the goal of returning the water body to class 3. The factors that will guide an assessment under 4.3 k) will be determined at the BMC.

Risk Informed Management Approach. Table 1 provides a high-level summary of the four classes, including key commitments at each class, and some considerations for classification. To improve the transparency and consistency of classification, the appendices of each Bilateral Water Management Agreement may contain more specific criteria and representative conditions that correspond to each class. However, the Parties recognize the need to retain flexibility in the future, as it will be impossible to identify every possible consideration. In general, as described in Table 1, water bodies with no or very low development/use are class 1. At class 1, it is expected that the Jurisdictional Water Management practices of each Party will be sufficient to meet transboundary commitments. Other than reporting, no Bilateral Water Management actions are required in this class. As warranted by increased development/use and other factors, Transboundary Waters will be moved to higher classes, where Bilateral Water Management actions are identified to complement Jurisdictional Water Management practices. Some level of current or planned development/use is necessary for a water body to move from class 1 to class 2, but there is no single threshold of development/use that causes a water body to move to class 2 or 3. To move from a class 1 to 2 or from class 2 to 3, the level of development/use is considered along with other factors to classify water bodies using a risk-informed approach. Other factors beyond development levels that may influence the assignment of a water body to class 2 or class 3 include, but are not limited to:  • Natural or other anthropogenic stressors or vulnerabilities;  • Sensitive water or ecosystem uses (e.g., traditional uses, drinking waters, heritage sites or parks);  • Use conflicts or controversy;  • Water quality and quantity conditions or trends; and  • Aquatic Ecosystem (e.g., biological, human health or traditional use) conditions or trends. In other words, a water body that is stressed or vulnerable (e.g., low winter flows, etc.), supports sensitive uses (e.g., traditional use, drinking water, etc.), experiences water use conflicts (e.g., conflicts among users or public controversy about water or ecosystem conditions), and/or demonstrates negative conditions or trends in water quality, water quantity or Aquatic Ecosystem Indicators, may be moved up in class at a lower level of development/use than a water body that does not. The intensity of Bilateral Water Management will increase as required to support continued achievement of RIM goals and Transboundary Objectives. At class 2, a Learning Plan tailored to the needs of the water body will be developed. Learning Plans will be developed using an integrated approach, and will address relevant water quality, water quantity, Groundwater and biological considerations. As part of the Learning Plan, Triggers may be established to support learning, to prepare for setting and assessing the achievement of Transboundary Objectives, and to proactively address any negative trends. Triggers are defined in the Agreement as specific conditions defined by the Parties that will require a Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management response. More specifically, in the context of RIM, a Trigger is a pre-defined early warning of change in typical or extreme conditions that results in confirmation of the change and Jurisdictional and/or Bilateral Water Management to address the change/trend. Multiple Triggers can be set to invoke additional actions as necessary (e.g.necessary, for example, if there are degrading conditions) , and Triggers can be set for class 2 and 3 Transboundary Waters. At class 2, Triggers may be established as part of the Learning Plans to initiate various kinds of management oversight or action (e.g., set a Transboundary Objective). At class 3, Transboundary Objectives will be established based on detailed, site-specific analysis. Transboundary Objectives establish conditions that the responsible Party or Parties commit to meet. If the BMC determines that Transboundary Objectives are not met, the water body will be designated class 4, at which point the responsible Party or Parties will identify and implement action as in section 4.3 j) through n) of the Agreement, with the goal of returning the water body to class 3. The factors that will guide an assessment under 4.3 k) will be determined at the BMC.