Department of State No Date 03 0312015 LIMITED OFFICIAL USE - IDECONTROLLEW U S POSITION PAPER UNEP OZONE LAYER PROTOCOL NEGOTIATIONS THIRD SESSION APRIL 27 - 30 1987 RELEASEDINFULM GENEVA SWITZERLAND I Background This is the third round of resumed negotiations under UNEP auspices on a protocol to control chemicals which deplete strato- spheric ozone In the first session December 1986 there was general agree ment on the need for international measures to control emissions of ozone-depleting chemicals However differences remained over the scope stringency and timing of the controls and_other key issues what to control how to allocate national limits The U S assumed a leadership role at this session maintaining that the risk to the ozone layer warranted a scheduled phase down of emissions of the major ozone-depleting chemicals We also emphasized that the protocol should provide for periodic assessment and possible adjustment of the control measures based on a periodic review of advances in scientific technical knowledge In the second session February 1987 and in discussions with the EC and other key participants since then substantial progress has been made toward acceptance of the U S freeze reduction approach Other proposals which would seriously disadvantage the U S preposals to allocate emissions limits on the basis of population and GNP have been deflected In add ition the EC Japan and possibly the USSR appear to be moving toward broadening coverage beyond CFCs 11 and 12 and have accepted the need for further reduction steps beyond the freeze U S proposals for trade provisions and review mechanisms have also met with general agreement The third session is intended by the UNEP organizers and most other participants to resolve remaining issues particularly the reduction process and schedule I Overall Position The general objectives for the USG continue to be as delineated in the Circular 175 of November 28 1986 A A near term freeze on the combined emissions of the most ozone-depleting substances B A long term scheduled reduction of emissions of these chemicals down to the point of eliminating emissions from all but limited uses for which no substitutes are commercially available such reduction could be as much as subject to and REVIEW AUTHORITY Adolph Eisner Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED S Department of State No 005327597 Date 03 03 2015 5 3 2 '7 5 9 7Wep rtment of State No 305327597 Date 03 03 2015 A A Periodic review of the protocol provisions based upon regular assessment of the science The review could remove oniadd chemicals or change the schedule or the emission reduction target Objectives for this Session Keep the negotiations focused on elaborating a protocol based on the 0 5 freeze reduction approach now included in the Chairman's text and resist efforts to resurrect other options Canadian Soviet Continue to press for as broad a coverage as possible of potentially major ozone depleters CFC ll 12 113 114 115 Halons 1211 and 1301 Focus attention on defining a meaningful initial reduction step beyond a freeze Try tO'narrow stringency and timing ranges in the Chair's control article text Maintain 0 8 position on need for longer-term phasedown consistent with overall negotiating goals section II above Elaborate earlier 0 8 positions on trade and scientific assessment which have received strong support Strive for progress on the LDC issue emphasizing an approach that will encourage LDCs to join but does not undercut our longjrange environmental objectives Work toward a mix of protocol elements which encourages as many producer and user countries as possible to become Parties including Eastern Bloc countries 1V Positions on Specific Tgpics Scope of Chemical Coverag_ The delegation should strive to have all the major potential ozone depleters CFC 11 12 113 114 115 halon 1211 and 1301 subject to the control article reduction schedule However after the freeze the delegation may consider putting 114 115 and or the halons under a different control regime as a means of encouraging broader country participation or achieving other key U S objectives UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State No 305327597 Date 03 03 2015 TH us Department of State No 005327597 Date 03 03 2015 -3- Stringency_and Timing lg Freeze Virtually all delegations have accepted that the first step should be a freeze at 1986 levels and the delegation should continue to support this The delegation should also strongly support a timing of one year after entry into force for the freeze the EC proposal calls for a timing of 2 years after entry into force The delegation could also explore the possibility of having the freeze and a ban on non-essential aerosols take effect prior to entry into force of the protocol via a voluntary commitment in a Diplomatic Conference resolution 2 Reduction Schedule The Chair's text calls for a 10 50% reduction in brackets for the second phase in an unspeci fied period of time The EC's Opening position is for a 20% reduction within six years after entry into force with an automatic trigger it would go into effect unless amended by a two-thirds vote of the Parties Within the context of the Circular 175 authority the delegation should continue to explore various combinations of reduction schedules ranging between the EC proposal and the U S proposed protocol text The delegation should not at this meeting definitively agree to specific terms but rather aim for a bracketed text consistent with the Circular 175 authority for further review in Washington Calculation of emissions The delegation should continue to seek a formula to use as the basis-for control which does not undercut the control measures encourages innovative practices and technologies in support of those measures maximizes trade freedom among parties does not put the U S at a competitive disadvantage vis a vis other parties and encourages the broadest participation possible Thus the delegation should continue to pursue for this session the adjusted production formula P I D Honever if agreement on this is not possible and there appears to be no movement by the EC in particular the delegation may explore other formulas on an 3g referendum i basis which meet the above criteria If there is significant opposition to including amount destroyed in the initial base year calculation the delegation may discuss letting for the first 1 3 years after entry into force of the protocol The delegation should reserve its position on whether permanently encapsulated should be counted in this term Trade between Parties and Noanarties The delegation should actively support trade provisions which protect countries party to the protocol from being put at a competitive disadvantage vis a vis non-parties create an incentive for noneparties to join the protocol and discourage the movement of production to non-parties UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State No 005327597 Date 03 03 2015 5 3 2 7 5 9 73IED us Department of State No 305327597 Date 03 03 201 -4- Therefore the delegation should continue to support the trade article developed at the last session and resist attempts to weaken it The delegation should seek the drafting improvements recommended by the interagency trade issues group see attached paper Developing Countries The delegation should continue to be open to an provision in order to encourage broader membership in the protocol However the delegation should stress that any form of exemption must not signifi- cantly undermine the environmental goals of the protocol Scientific Assessment The delegation should insist that scientific assessment be an integral part of the protocol The delegation should support having a legal drafting group take the various texts for assessment mechanisms now on the table and draft a composite text which provides for possible adjustment of the controls based on regular and emergency review of scientific technical and economic information The report of the scientific sub group from the last session and the text of Article IV of the U S proposed text tabled at first session and largely accepted by the EC should be used as a focus for this exercise Regarding timing of the reviews the delegation should support having regular CCOL level reviews at least every two years a major review like the et a1 assessment at least every four years and emergency reviews when called for by the Parties Entry into Force_provisions The draft protocol text Article XII calls for entry into force thirty days after deposit of nine instruments of ratification At the 5 first sessionr the USSR opposed the 9 30 format in favor of an 11 90 requirement If this continues to be a major obstacle to Soviet concurrence on this article the delega tion may accept a 10 60 or 11 90 format The delegation should also seek to amend this article so as to ensure that the protocol enters into force only when a sufficient number of the major producer user countries have deposited instruments of ratification Thus the delegation should propose that this article specify that of the number of instruments required for entry into force 50% of total world consumption or production is represented or a substantial majority 75% be from countries with an adjusted production or whatever formula is agreed to greater than a certain level the delegation would agree to propose a specific value for this at a subsequent session UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State WTEDFWWEHQSEOC N0 C05327597 Date 03 03 2015 US Department of State No 305327597 Date 03 03 2015 -5- The delegation should also seek to amend this article so as to avoid creating an incentive for some countries to delay entry into the protocol while reaping the global environmental benefits of reductions by countries which became Parties at the outset To this end the delegation should seek to add the following at the end of paragraph 3 of this article Any such Party shall assume all applicable obligations then in effect for all other Parties H Other Legal Institutional issues The delegation should seek drafting improvements consistent with the substantive elements of 0 3 position V 0ther Issues A Future Session In the event that it is not possible to complete work on the protocol at this session which is likely the delegation should support UNEP convening a fourth session in early July B Tactics No members of the delegation shall advocate or indicate support for substantial negotiating element not in this position paper All members of the delegation are I required to obtain approval from the head of delegation before discussing with any person outside the delegation any fall-back position in this position paper C Press All press inquiries shall be referred to the head or alternate head of delegation or their designee D Budgetary Commitments The delegation should not commit the USG to any activity which cannot be funded out of current appropriations Drafted by Jim Losey -- 382 4894 Suzanne Butcher - State OBS 647-9312 4 22 87 UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State WTEDWWESQSEOC No 305327597 Date 03 03 2015                     National Security Archive    Suite 701  Gelman Library  The George Washington University    2130 H Street  NW  Washington  D C  20037    Phone  202 994‐7000  Fax  202 994‐7005  nsarchiv@gwu edu