The undersigned associations and organizations, representing all sectors across the United States and Canada, are

firmly committed to the Canada-U.S. commercial relationship and recognize that developing methods to strengthen bilateral ties is essential to spur growth and jobs. The U.S.Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) represents one of the most innovative ways to tackle enduring barriers to bilateral commerce and guarantee North Americas long-term prosperity. Moreover, as two high-income democracies with advanced regulatory systems and similar expectations of protection, it is only natural that we search for ways to deepen our level of regulatory cooperation to increase efficiency and more effectively face third-country risk. In November 2012, a group of dedicated stakeholders announced the creation of a Stakeholder Coordination Council1 in response to a need for improved stakeholder engagement within the RCC. Since that time we have been encouraged by signs the United States and Canada recognize the value of increasing stakeholder coordination and conducting more frequent outreach. Nonetheless, there is much work to be done if the RCC is to realize its potential and set a global standard for bilateral cooperation. We are pleased the Federal Register notice and the Gazette notification mention the desire to improve bilateral cooperation. However, in order to truly achieve success, the RCC should be thought of in terms of trilateral cooperation between the U.S. and Canadian governments as well as stakeholders. Therefore, we respectfully offer suggestions in several key areas to strengthen and improve the RCC. Finish Current Work Plans The top priority for the RCC co-chairs should be ensuring timely completion of the current Work Plans. Most of the Working Group leads have been forthcoming about progress, but it is unclear whether all the timelines are still on track. The Working Group leads should provide periodic assessment of the Work Plan progress, including areas where goals/deliverables have been met, as well as a discussion of any pending proposed rules and their expected timelines. Furthermore, any delays in the progress of individual Work Plans should be accompanied by an explanation of the barriers encountered that prevented meeting goals in a timely manner, and proposed rules that are pending or expected to be proposed and timelines for those rules. Additionally, agencies should publicize gains that may have been made on U.S.-Canada cooperative activities not contained in the Work Plans. Stakeholders are eager to applaud areas where gains have already been realized and also to provide assistance to work through any complicated issues that may have slowed expected progress in other areas. Improve Stakeholder Engagement

The SCC serves as an inclusive group, open to any business or association interested in supporting the continued success of the RCC. In the past year the SCC has held monthly phone calls and other events in order to share information and connect those with similar interests. For more information, please see https://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/SCC%20Letter%20Nov%202012.pdf.pdf
1

We are pleased to see the steady improvement of stakeholder engagement since the launch of the RCC. While webinars and phone calls are being conducted on an increasing basis, engagement still lacks a consistent routine, making it difficult for stakeholders to receive and offer regular updates. Moving forward, the RCC should develop a public outreach plan that features stakeholder engagement on a routine basis. This will ensure that the Work Plans are kept on track and potential problems are spotted in a timely manner. Engagement must also feature effective two-way communications and can incorporate technology, such as digital video conferences. Stakeholder involvement should also include more than regular updates. Stakeholders should be part of a proactive process to find solutions that can ease regulatory burdens. As industry adheres to the regulatory requirements operative in their respective countries, it is important for the RCC to consider industry experiences, concerns and potential solutions prior to and during the development of any new or ongoing initiative. Recent discussions by the RCC co-chairs have left many stakeholders concerned that the work being done in the RCC might not actually result in removing barriers. We believe it is essential that industry be consulted as a true partner in this initiative rather than the recipient of results from already completed activities. Although the RCC leads from both countries have been generous with their time and travel, enhanced efforts in these areas are required in order to convince those in the states and provinces that this is more than a DC and Ottawa project. Stakeholder engagement plans should feature regular in-person visits to interested regions around the United States and Canada. Local industry groups are often looking for opportunities to hold direct conversations with key regulators and can easily be mobilized to host events or other discussions. Increase Transparency The next generation of RCC initiatives should strive to ensure transparency through methods easily accessible to stakeholders. This could include providing an updated list of working group leads and centralized contact points for agencies. Comments received for this submission should also be made public so groups with common goals can connect and support shared interests. The United States already posts comments through regulations.gov, and Canada should take steps to do the same, possibly by asking permission from commenters to make their submissions publicly available. When new initiatives are chosen, the RCC leads should provide details publicly about their reasoning and why some submissions were viewed as not yet ready for inclusion. This will provide stakeholders with guidance on how to structure future submissions in ways most useful for regulators and which may enhance their future chance of inclusion. The United States and Canada are cooperating in fora besides the RCC. However, many of these cooperative arrangements arent well documented, nor are there clear paths for stakeholder input. There should be an effort to catalogue and publish a list of all the regulatory cooperation arrangements and MOUs currently in place between the United States and Canada. The RCCs
2

existing infrastructure and engagement best practices should then be applied to these existing dialogues to ensure even greater success. Launch New Initiatives While we appreciate the request for new submissions, the 45-day window for submitting comments may prove difficult to meet for many stakeholders, particularly Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs). The stakeholder community is diligently working to develop detailed plans about future initiatives, and extending the commenting period would result in more robust submissions. An extended deadline will also provide an opportunity for greater engagement with the RCC leads for feedback on ways that stakeholder input could best supplement Work Plans and aid in designing new initiatives. Low hanging fruit is obviously quite worthwhile, and picking the easy ideas is important to demonstrate the RCC can be a success. However, the RCC is ultimately about building a taller ladder to get to the tougher issues. The next wave of initiatives should shoot for some more difficult goals and consider areas that could have potentially global application. The next phase of Work Plans should also consider mutual recognition of entire sectors, rather than incremental alignment. Institutionalize Regulatory Cooperation: Perhaps most importantly, the United States and Canada must make significant steps to institutionalize regulatory cooperation and ensure it is a permanent fixture of regulatory activity. Therefore, a system needs to be created that streamlines organic growth of the RCC. There must be opportunities to add new ideas and expand Work Plans on a continuous basis, regardless of whether a request for submissions is pending. Opportunities for improvement may spontaneously arise, and agencies should be able to take advantage of good ideas whenever they occur. The United States and Canada should also empower agencies to proactively seek out cooperative arrangements beyond those already laid out in the RCC by bolstering their mandates. There needs to be a system in place that automatically flags regulatory activities that might have a substantial impact on the RCC programs or selected priority sectors. U.S. and Canadian regulatory agencies should ultimately get to a point where considering international impacts of their work is second nature. The RCC should also begin to develop processes that address the priority the United States and Canada have placed on regulatory look-backs that examine current regulations to see if they have resulted in the intended affects. These processes should include the ability to evaluate existing cooperative arrangements or rules where both countries have the same regulatory requirements to determine if those situations actually lower trade barriers or instead just create an extra burdensome rule on both sides of the border. We appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback and look forward to working with Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) and the Privy Council Office to support implementation of our suggestions.

Sincerely, American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA) American Chamber of Commerce in Canada American Meat Institute Automotive Parts Manufacturers Association (Canada) Buffalo Niagara Partnership Canadian American Business Council Canadian Chamber of Commerce Canadian Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters Canadian Meat Council Consumer Healthcare Products Association Consumer Health Products Canada Council of the Great Lakes Region (Toronto and Cleveland) CropLife America Detroit Regional Chamber Food & Consumer Products of Canada Fruit and Vegetable Dispute Resolution Corporation The Greater Cleveland Partnership Great Lakes Manufacturing Council Great Lakes Metro Chambers Coalition Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce (Ontario, Canada) Greater Pittsburgh Chamber of Commerce Minnesota Chamber of Commerce Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association National Association of State Departments of Agriculture Pacific Northwest Economic Region Personal Care Products Council Toledo Regional Chamber of Commerce U.S. Chamber of Commerce Windsor Essex Chamber