link to page 1 
Updated August 30, 2019
The International Joint Commission (IJC)
The International Joint Commission (IJC) was established
carrying out the duties of the treaty. The IJC’s decisions
under the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty between the
and recommendations are the result of objective analysis
United States and Canada. The treaty directs the IJC to aid
and are not necessarily a reflection of U.S. or Canadian
in the resolution and prevention of disputes concerning the
national policies.
waters that cross (transboundary) or form (boundary) the
international border between the two countries, known
The IJC has two primary duties under the treaty: 1) examine
collectively as boundary waters. The watersheds of these
and report on questions or matters of difference between the
boundary waters are illustrated in Figure 1. The IJC may be
U.S. and Canadian governments, known as a reference, and
asked to consider issues related to drinking water,
2) approve any work in boundary waters affecting water
commercial shipping, hydroelectric power generation,
levels on either side of the boundary, known as an Order of
agriculture, industry, recreational boating, and shoreline
Approval (Order). The IJC currently supervises more than
property, among others. Congressional interest in the IJC
20 expert boards and task forces that respond to references
often has focused on the IJC’s scope of authority, its role in
and monitor the implementation of Orders; these groups
specific disputes, and funding for the U.S. portion of IJC
draw upon the expertise of around 300 representatives from
activities.
various organizations.
IJC Functions
Reference
The IJC functions as a nonpolitical research, advisory, and
A reference addresses a question or a matter of difference
mediation body for the two national governments. The IJC
between the United States and Canada. A reference can be
has six commissioners: three appointed by the President of
submitted either by both countries or by one country. If
the United States with the approval of the Senate (these
jointly submitted, the reference contains specific questions
positions are reappointed by each incoming Administration)
for the IJC to answer and a timeframe for a response,
and three appointed by the Governor in Council of Canada
among other provisions. Under Article IX of the treaty, the
with the advice of the Prime Minister. The commissioners
IJC is authorized to examine and report the facts of the
of each country select a chair apiece. The two chosen chairs
questions under the reference and to draw conclusions and
serve concurrently. Canadian commissioners have fixed
make recommendations as appropriate. Once the IJC
terms that vary from two years to five years. The IJC needs
receives a reference, it generally appoints a board or task
a quorum of four commissioners to make decisions and
force to conduct technical investigations. The IJC also
generally reaches decisions through consensus.
holds public hearings and other forms of consultation and
Commissioners do not formally represent their countries
reports its findings and recommendations to both
and must declare in writing that they will be impartial when
governments.
Figure 1. U.S.-Canada Transboundary and Boundary Watersheds
Source: CRS, modified from U.S. Geological Survey, at https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/4fb697b2e4b03ad19d64b47f, and IJC,
“Transboundary Waters,” at https://www.ijc.org/en/transboundary-waters.
Notes: State and province names are abbreviated. The areas denoted in dark blue designate transboundary and boundary watersheds along the
border between the United States and Canada.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
The International Joint Commission (IJC)
Upon the IJC’s issuance of a report, the governments may
progress toward meeting GLWQA objectives, and invites
request that the commission monitor progress in
further public engagement.
implementing the report’s recommendations.
Potential Issues for Congress
IJC recommendations in response to references are
Although decisions related to applications are binding, IJC
nonbinding. For example, according to the IJC, the two
reference recommendations are nonbinding. Congress may
governments did not implement recommendations reported
consider whether issued or future reference
in 1962 regarding the Pembina River Basin. However,
recommendations should be binding. Some stakeholders
under treaty Article X, references that involve the rights,
contend that the nonbinding nature of IJC recommendations
obligations, or interests of either government in relation to
hampers the IJC’s ability to effectively address issues
the other can be presented to the IJC for a binding decision.
involving the boundary waters. Others maintain that the
nonbinding nature of IJC recommendations allows each
Order of Approval
country to decide how to best handle issues and retain
Under treaty Articles III or IV, a government can submit an
sovereignty. Addressing the role of the IJC might involve
application seeking the IJC’s approval for proposed works
revising provisions of the treaty, which would need the
or activities (such as dams, diversions, or bridges) that
agreement of both the United States and Canada.
would use, change (with respect to water level), obstruct, or
divert boundary waters. The IJC then creates a board or
Congress also might consider new policy mechanisms to
uses an existing board to review the submitted application.
increase flexibility in implementing Orders and their
The board determines whether the project should proceed
associated conditions, as advocated for by some
and how it should be operated. The IJC also holds public
stakeholders. For example, Plan 2014 aims to provide for
hearings on the application and allows stakeholders to
more natural flows of water in Lake Ontario to support
provide input.
ecosystem health, while continuing to regulate flooding
along the lake and upstream of the Moses-Saunders Dam in
If the IJC decides to approve the project with conditions, it
Canada. Critics argue that Plan 2014 has led to increased
is to issue an Order. For example, in 1952, the IJC received
property flooding in the United States; supporters contend
and approved an application from the United States and
that the plan supports healthy coastal habitats, thereby
Canada to build and operate the Moses-Saunders Dam on
improving the economy of the area and enhancing the
the St. Lawrence River via an Order. Concurrent to the
resiliency of natural shorelines. The IJC has concluded that
application filing, the two countries jointly submitted a
operations under Plan 2014 have not significantly
reference to study whether dam outflows could be regulated
contributed to flooding but have instead aimed to minimize
to achieve certain objectives. In 1963, the two governments
flooding from precipitation in the area. Some contend that
approved Plan 1958D, which included criteria to regulate
Plan 2014 should contain broader mechanisms to adaptively
flows through the dam. The IJC reviews Orders for projects
manage flows into and out of Lake Ontario; whereas other
from time to time and has the authority to amend an Order.
stakeholders contend this would diminish environmental
For instance, the IJC amended the 1952 Order in 1956 and
benefits. Some stakeholders also suggest that the IJC should
again in 2016. As required in the 1956 Order, the United
receive appropriations by both countries to establish a fund
States and Canada officially concurred with changes
to compensate property owners for their losses or to
proposed in the 2016 Order and its associated conditions,
construct infrastructure to reduce flood damages.
known as Plan 2014.
Both the United States and Canada fund the IJC, with
expenses for projects and reports shared equally between
Congress and the IJC
the two countries. Congress appropriated between $7.51
Congress primarily interacts with the IJC through its
million and $8.05 million per year to the IJC from FY2016
appropriation of funds to the IJC and its approval of
to FY2019. The Administration has requested $7.45 million
nominated IJC commissioners. Congress also may conduct
in FY2020. Some stakeholders argue that Congress should
oversight of the IJC or projects and activities influenced by IJC
increase funding to the IJC for additional monitoring of
decisions through hearings and letters to U.S. commissioners.
projects and actions in the boundary waters. Others suggest
Additionally, Congress can address boundary water issues by
that Congress should establish and fund IJC grant programs
working with the executive branch or through enactment of
to support boundary water projects. This proposal is
new legislation; however, legislation must adhere to the treaty
opposed by those who contend that the authority to finance
and bilaterally approved IJC activities or run the risk of
projects should be limited to states and provinces, and not
violating the treaty.
an international body.
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
Eva Lipiec, Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
Since 1972, the IJC also has implemented the Great Lakes
Pervaze A. Sheikh, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). The GLWQA
IF10761
addresses water quality issues; the IJC provides technical
assistance, assesses implementation effectiveness and
https://crsreports.congress.gov
The International Joint Commission (IJC)
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10761 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED