6IFIED US Department of State Case igh g mm g Doc No C05327466 Date 03 03 2015 United Slates of State ashinglan D C 2052 June 9 1987 CONFIDENTIAL BRIEFING MEMORANDUM IN 5 8 To The Deputy Secretary TRON OBS - Richard E Benedick Acting m i3 SUBJECT Domestic Policy Council Meeting on Protocol to Control Ozone-Depleting Chemicals - 11 00 Thursday June 11 I YOUR OBJECTIVE The first DPC Meeting on this subject May 20 -- Allen Wallis attending failed to resolve deep agency divisions over the U S negotiat ing position Following this the Secretary wrote Ed Meese outlining his concern and co ncisely summarizing the Department' 3 position and rationale see Tab B Your objective is to obtain DPC agree ment that we continue to negotiate for a strong international accord to control cache-depleting chemicals or failing agreement to put the matter to the President without further delay The talking points emphasize the risks of loss of international credibility domestic political backlash and un-desirable unilateral regulation if we fail to continue the heretofore successful U S leadership role in these negotiations I am scheduled to brief you at 9 30 a m on June 11 and as the head v 5 negotiator I have been asked orally to frame the negotiating issues for the Council II BACKGROUND The Issue Through three tough and well-publicized negotiating 'rounds under United Nations Environment Programme UNEP auspices since last December participating _countries have moved toward consensus on a schedule for reducing emissions of ozone-depleting chemicals The issues are complex and interrelated see May 18 DPC Memorandum at Tab E but the central point of division is the extent of reductions which the CONFIDENTIAL REVIEW AUTHORITY Adolph Eisner Senior My Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Doc No 305327466 Date 03 03 2015 5 3 2 7 4 6 6FIED US Department of State Case gh g mm a Doc No 005327466 Date 03 03 2015 0 5 should support and whether the reductions should be scheduled as semi-automatic reversible by vote of parties or only implemented upon a future reaffirmation by parties in both cases preceded by a scientific economic and technological assessment The debate centers on whether the 0 8 should support the Chairman's draft protocol text which was developed at the April international negotiation and which provides for a freeze on production consumption of the chemicals within two years after entry into force EIF - 0 pa 20% reduction four years after EIF and a further 30% reduction six years after EIF subject to reaffirmation or eight years after EIF The UNEP Executive Director has asked for government comments on this draft by June 19 Informal but crucial negotiations in the Chairman's Group of selected delegation heads I will represent the occur June 28 30 in Brussels A Conference of Plenipotentiaries to approve the protocol is formally scheduled for September l4 16 in Montreal following a full negotiating round September 8 11 - other relevant factors include a Senate resolution on ozone protection passed last Friday by 80-2 calling for the 0 5 to negotiate a prompt automatic reduction of not less than 50% and the virtual elimination of such chemicals see Tab C pending legislation in both Senate and House call for unilateral 8 3 reductions of up to 95 percent 0 a pending court case could force EPA to regulate unilaterally if the international negotiations fail to come up with a strong protocol 0 several countries have recently expressed concern over whether the 0 8 is changing its strong position including the FRG and Japan who noted that previous high-level U S representations have influenced them to rethink their own positions CONFIDENTIAL UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Doc No 005327466 Date 03 03 2015 FIED US Department of State Case gh - M QEQ Doc No 005327466 Date 03 03 2015 CONFIDENTIAL - 3 - Agency Views Lee Thomas EPA will open the DPC meeting by presenting information requested on May 20 on health and climatic effects of ozone depletion and on the legal legislative situation Beryl Sprinkel will follow with a cost-benefit analysis Thomas strongly believes the international agreement should include substantial firmly scheduled reductions subject to reversal only following new information in order to provide a epowerful market incentive for development of safer substitutes Most agencies and most nations participating in the negotiations agree on a freeze and a semi-automatic I 20% reduction all protocol provisions are subject to change by 2 3 vote OSTP and Interior want the 20% reduction to depend on a majority positive vote of parties following a scheduled 1990 scientific assessment they strongly oppose any further cuts While several agencies at staff level have questioned scheduling a semi-automatic 30% cut 0MB Commerce Energy and possibly the Council of Economic Advisors the intensity of their feeling is uncertain USTR NSC the Vice-President's Office Justice and possibly Defense appear leaning toward the State-EPA original negotiating position As part of their effort to prevent agreement on this treaty some agencies Interior OSTP have raised other issues such as mandatory requirements for verification of compliance weighted voting and adherence by most or all potential CFC producers developing countries While these are all desirable and part of our negotiating position the overall benefits of an international accord are sufficiently significant that we should not make these points absolute conditions for 0 5 adherence State Position State should firmly support the text which has emerged from the negotiations freeze 20% 30% and EPA's position favoring semi-automatic reductions Ideal and flexible i guidance to the 0 5 negotiators would be the points in the enclosure to the Secretary's June 1 letter to Ed Hesse Tab A which is fully consistent with the original Circular 175 negotiating authority Tab D If this cannot be agreed State should insist that the issue go to the President in accord with the Secretary's letter CONFIDENTIAL UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Doc No 005327466 Date 03 03 2015 61FIED US Department of State Doc No 005327466 Date 4 - - CONFIDENTIAL 4 - TALKING POINTS International agreement is within reach largely on 0 8 terms -- Lee Thomas is charged by the President and by legislative mandate with environmental protection He has concluded that the existing U S position is a prudent approach to risk management in the face of current scientific knowledge -- To modify our negotiating position now would pose substantial risks of a loss of international credibility in View of the leadership role we have played 0 domestic political backlash on an issue which has brought great credit to the Administration and unilateral controls the worst possible outcome for U S industry and consumers forced by the clean Air Act court order or new legislation -- In order not to-further jeopardize the progress we have made in this major international negotiation Secretary Shultz and I propose that we instruct the U S representative to continue to negotiate in conformance with the existing Circular 175 -- Our objective is to conclude a strong and effective agreement by September containing provisions summarized as follows see next page which is the enclosure to the Secretary's letter -- If any agency has compelling objections to this we should take the matter to the President without further delay 6 9 87 CONFIDENTIAL UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Doc No 005327466 Date 03 03 2015 FIED US Department of State Doc No 00532746 Date 03 03 2015 Enclosures Tab A - Evening Reading June 5 Tab - Shultz-Meese Exchange of Letters Tab - Senate Resolution Tab 1 - Circular 175 Excerpt Tab - May 18 DPC Memorandum UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Doc No 305327467 Date 03 03 2015 5 3 2 7 4 6 U-S- Department of 005327469 Date 03 03 2015 Evening Reading This is to alert you that the Domestic olicy council DPC neets next week to consider 0 8 policy in ongoing international negotiations on protection of the stratospheric ozone layer John - Hhitehead will represent ne Until no- the 0 8 has played a estrong and widely acclaimed leadership role in these talks I have written Ed Reese of my strong belief that a weakening of the 0 8 negotiating position as advocated by some agencies would generate adverse political reactions at home and abroad Strong feelings in Congress could lead to stringent unilateral 0 8 4 regulations which would be far less desirable-for 0 8 industry and consumers than a global accord a retreat could also undermine our credibility in the area of international - environmental protection dhen in fact this negotiation presents an 5 excellent opportunity for the Administration to score a significant success in this field Drafted ick at ClearancewE stMoponte 'woasu 6 5 87 DEM REVIEW AUTHORITY Adolph Eisner Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED US Department of C05327469 Date 03 03 2015 US Department of State Doc No C05327475 Date 03 03 2015 3 COPY GIVEN TO SCOTT THAYER 0 'mr arcnrunv or start 09 ASKINGTON 1n arse June 1 1987 1 I RELEASED IN FULL 8 5 Dell Ed SIS-S I wanted you to know of my strong personal interest in the early and successful completion of an effective international BB treaty to protect the stratospheric ozone layer through reducing use of certain chlorofluorocarbons ores and halons This is a DES subject which has attracted intense Congressional and sedia interest and which nany regard as the highest priority environmental issue on the global agenda International agreement is now within reach largely on v 3 terns The 0 8 position was developed through intensive - interagency deliberations leading up to and following the authority to negotiate Circular 175 which was approved on Iy behalf by Under Secretary Allen Hallie last Hovenber Implementing that authority the Des delegation has succeeded through three difficult negotiating rounds in turning aside control proposals which would have been disadvantageous to the United States and in gaining wide acceptance of the v 3 position I so now concerned however that within the Domestic Policy Council process a few agencies are advocating positions which would in effect reopen the entire international negotiation which is scheduled for completion in September at a Conference of Plenipotentiaries in nontreal I understand and synpathise with concerns over both scientific uncertainties and the possible economic ispact of _ut controls Bowever Lee Thomas who is charged with environmental pr' protection by the President as well as by legislative aandate has - concluded after over two years of analysis that the 0 85 - - Zpoaition is a prudent approach to risk Ianagenent I agree with 'hin Although scientific certitude is probably unattainable I am impressed by the growing international consensus on the threat to the ozone layer largely due to research by our own NASA and loan This consensus in sanitest in the changed positions of both The Honorable Edwin eece REVIEW AUTHORI I Y Adolph Eisner Semor Attorney General Re ewer CONFIDENTIAL DECL OADR UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Doc No 005327475 Date 03 03 2015 5 3 2 7 4 US Department of State Doc No 005327475 Date 03 03 2015 11 CONFIDENTIAL - 2 - u s industry which now officially advocates at least a global freeze on production of CFCs and the European Community which has proposed a freeze followed by a 20 percent autosatic reduction and which last month agreed to consider a further 30 percent reduction Based on contacts with industry it appears that the 20 percent reduction which would not come into effect until 1992-94 could be absorbed by 0 8 industry utilising existing alternative products and processes While the additional 30 percent cut would require substitute products the additional tine frame for such reduction 8 to 12 years from now would be within the I'confort none' for the market system to provide incentives for the needed Rib I believe it would be inadvisable for us to delay the negotiations or to appear now less concerned over protecting the ozone layer than the European Community and others who have followed our leadership John Whitehead Lee Thomas and I - American Ambassadors abroad and senior officials on my staff have all advocated the v 5 position in contacts with senior foreign officials This has contributed to the evolution of policy in many countries A perceived reversal by the v 5 risks- 'an embarrassing loss of international credibility as well as domestic political backlash Moreover it would risk the worst possible outcome from the standpoint of 0 8 industry and consumers namely unilateral 0 8 controls added to our 1978 -ban on CFCs for aerosol use forced by the Clean Air Act by court order or by new legislation There are already growing rumors in Congress and among public interest groups that the Administration is backsliding' from its previously such-praised commitment to protect the ozone layer In order not to jeopardise the progress we have made in this pajor international negotiation and following consultation with '- Lee Thomas I propose to instruct the 0 8 Representative to continue to negotiate in conforaance with the existing Circular 175 authority The objective is a strong and effective international agreement by September containing provisions as summarised in the enclosure which is consistent with the interagency position developed prior to the cost recent negotiating round in April I hepe you will agree that this is a reasonable position Only a protocol which provides for significant reductions in CFC's can prudently address the environmental risks avert needless CONFIDENTIAL UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Doc No 305327475 Date 03 03 2015 5 3 2 7 4 7 SSIFIED US Department of State Casequ DOC No 305327475 Date 03 03 2015 3 - 3 - criticism of the Administration and probable unilateral domestic controls and provide the needed stimulus for industrial research into alternative products over a reasonable tine period The Administration will have the opportunity to review the negotiated protocol text before signature by our Government It you have any questions concerning these provisions 1 would be pleased to ask Assistant Secretary Negroponte to provide further deteils I propose to proceed on this basis unless you feel that this course of action is not feasible because of compelling objections from some members of the Domestic Policy Council In that'csse I propose that we together with Lee Thomas take this matter to the President without further delay Sincerely yours George P ' Enclocure Protocol Summary I II Drafted wose7y 5 29 87 Clearances D Hr riabie I Mr Bailey In Its Verville an Hr Bandit IPai r Thomas Pugliares subs CONFIDEHTIAL UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Doc No 005327475 Date 03 03 2015 5 3 2 7 4 6 US Department of State Casewh gg grem g Doc No 005327467 Date 03 03 2015 CONFIDENTIAL Protocol Summary 1 A freeze st 1986 levels on production consumption of CFCs ll 12 113 114 and 115 and Halons 1211 and 1301 to take effect one or two years after the protocol enters into force Elf 2 Periodically scheduled reductions of CFCs ll 12 113 114 and 115 from 1986 levels beginning with 20 percent two to four years after 21 followed by an additional 30 percent - approximately eight years after 21 with the possibility of further steps as determined by the parties 3 Regularly scheduled assessments of scientific economic and technologioa1 actors prior to any reductions to enable the 1 parties to adjust the reduction schedule and add or subtract chemicals - 4 An ultimate objective subject to the assessments mentioned above to eliminate substantially all potential threats to the stratospheric ozone layer from anthropogenic chemicals 5 Strong trade monitoring and reporting provisions to make the protocol as effective as possible a 6 An attempt to negotiate some system of voting which would give due weight to the currently significant producing and consuming countries _ REVIEW AUTHORITY Adolph Eisner Senior Reviewer CONFIDENTIAL UNCLASSEFIED US Department of State Doc No 005327467 Date 03 03 2015 US Department of 005327486 Date 03 03 2013 1 05 5 86367775 49-- i a 1 - 3 lulled Suits Depanmeni of Stair Radiation D C 20520 - a 0 ne 35 my 28 P9 es 1 223 in 21 3 ACTION MEMORANDUM 'iir imam t 935 11319 to 5 5 To'ro - Mr Wallis RELEASED IN 252-8 OBS - John D Negro re SUBJECT Circular 175 Request forquthorlty to Negotiate a Protocol to the Convention or the Protection s 3 of the Ozone Layer 0 ilconr rssus son necrsrou Whether to authorize negotiation of a protocol to the Vienna Convention for the rrotection of the-Ozone Layer which could control emissions of ozone-depleting substances s' asses-rm morons The Problem There is general scientific agreement that human activities are substantially altering the chemistry of the atmosphere in ways vhich threaten both the quantity and the vertical distribution of ozone Certain chlorine and bromine substances when emitted into the atmosphere act as in a series of chemical reactions resulting in a depletion of - ozone Ozone depletion by permitting greater quantities of 5 - harmful ultra-violet radiation to reach the earth's surface g will pose significant even it currently difficult to quantify - risks for health and ecosystems Given the complex chemistry and dynamics of the atmosphere scientific uncertainties currently prevent a conclusive determination of safe levels of emissions Because oi-the long atmospheric lifetime of these molecules emissions affect the ozone layer tor decades The nature of the ozone layer requires international action it protective oeasures are to be effective Che chemicals at issue for this protocol - chlorofluoro- carbons and some bromine compoundsI- have substantial economic and social value being widely used in refrigeration foam-blowing tire-extinguishers as solvents and in most countries as aerosols - Their use in non-essentinI aggogo1s vas banned in the United States in 1978 The 0 5 Japan and to countries currently account to about 90t o world a production and consumption _ REVIEW AUTHORITY Adolph Eisner Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED US Department of C05327486 Date 03 03 2015 IFIED US Department of 005327486 Date 03 03 2015 The International Process The Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer adopted under auspiCes of the U N Environment Program UNEP on March 22 1935 and ratified by the United States on August 14 1986 provides for cooperation in research monitoring and information exchange The Convention obliges the Parties to cooperate in taking measures to protect human health and the environment against adverse effects resulting or likely to result from human activities which modify or are likely to modify the ozone layer The Diplomatic Conference which adopted the Convention did not reach agreement however on a protocol to control emissions of ozone-depleting substances The final act of the Diplomatic Conference called for a series of scientific and economic workshops on the atmospheric science effects of ozone depletion and alternative control measures followed by resumption of negotiations looking toward adoption of a control protocol in 1987 if possible Negotiations are to resume December 1 1986 with a diplomatic conference to conclude the protocol tentatively scheduled for April 1987 The Domestic Setting The Environmental Protection Agency under terms of a court order approving a settlement reached in a lawsuit against the EPA Administrator by the Natural Resources Defense Council must publish in the Federal Register by May 1 1987 a proposed decision on the need for further domestic regulation of CFCs under Sec 157 of the Clean Air Act Compared to other environmental laws the Act sets a low threshhold for required uraction by EPA the Administrator shall propose regulations for the control of any substance practice Process or in his judgment may reasonably be anticipated to affect the stratosphere especially ozone in the stratosphere if such effect in the stratosphere may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare In this connection EPA is going through an extensive risk assessment 5 process a final EPA decision is required by the court order by November 1 1987 An important goal in seeking an early and effective international agreement in addition to the goal of more effectively protecting the ozone layer is to avoid disadvantage to 0 5 industry as a result of unilateral u s regulatory action required by the Clean Air Act Unilateral u s action in advance of international agreement could undercut the global control effort UNCLASSIFIED U S Department-of 005327486 Date 03 03 2015 5 3 2 7 4 8 US Department of Date 03 03 2015 -3- The principal producer- and user-industry group th 'hlliance for Responsible CFC Policy has reversed its- previous total opposition to controls issuing a statement September 16 1986 that 'responsible policy dictates given the scientific uncertainties that the 0 5 government work in cooperation with the world community rto consider establishing asreusonable global limit on the future rate of growth of fully halogenated CFC production capacity ' rroposed Position Our approach in the international negotiations is intended to influence those negotiations to achieve the most effective international agreement possible It does not prejudge the SPA Administrator's decision on domestic regulation Although considerable evidence exists linking certain - chlorine and bromine substances to depletion of'osone remaining scientific uncertainties prevent any conclusive statement concerning safe levels of emissions he a result the Administrator of EPA recommends an international risk management strategy which would give a strong incentive for rapid development and employment of emission controls recycling practices and safer substitute chemicals We should therefore seek a protocol that explicitly or in effect provides for l A near-tern freeze on the combined emissions of the most ozone-depleting substances - ll a long-term scheduled reduction oi emissions of these chemicals down to the point of eliminating emissions fro all but limited uses for which no substitutes are - commercially available such reduction could be as much is subject to Ill and w- Periodic review of the protocol provisions based upon regular assessment of the science The review could remove or add chemicals or change the schedule or the emission reduction target These elements could provide a desirable margin of safety against harm to the ozone layer while scientific research continues At the same time this approach would provide as UNCLASSEFIED Department of 005327486 Date 03 03 2015 us Department of Statqu gs gm g IERREE 005327486 Date 03 03 2015 much certainty as possible for industrial planning in o ger to minimise the costs of reducing reliance on these chemic s while allowing adequate time for adjustment if the timing stringency and scope of the phased reductions will have to be negotiated We would promote a scheme which -allows flexibility for each nation to determine how it will implement domestically its international obligation ln reponse to UNEP's invitation we have prepared for discussion purposes the attached draft test for the operative paragraphs of a protocol We would favor setting national limits at or near current levels in order to avoid increases in emissions from any Party Elimination of most emissions would obviate the difficult question of equity -- the view that developing countries have a right to a fair share of world carkets if a _ global limit on emissions is set developing countries will -have less reason to seek to expand use of products which will be obsolete in the forseeable future and they will bentfit from the development of substitutes and of recycling and containment techniques We will seek to include in the protocol measures to regulate relevant trade between parties and non parties in order to create incentives tor nations to adhere to the protocol's emissions limits These measures will have an ancillary effect of protecting v 5 industry from unfair competition we wil assure that any trade provisions included in the protocol are consistent with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade GATT and other aspects of u s trade policy a - we have undertaken extensive consultations with industry gkv and environmental groups and will continue to do so as the - negotiations progress vi NOTE REST OF DOCUMENT OMITTED NONESSENTIAL FOR THIS PURPOSE Document is as received from storage UNCLASSIFIED US Department of 005327486 Date 03 03 2015 US Department of 005327489 Date 03 03 2015 THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON PELEASEDINFULM Hay is 1937 MEMORANDUM TOR DOMESTIC COUNCIL IRON THE ENERGY NATURAL RESOURCES WORKING GROUP SUBJECT Stratospheric ozone Protocol negotiations Issue What should the 8 8 negotiating position be for elements of the protocol to protect the stratospheric ozone layer by controlling emissions of ozone-depleting substances chloro fluorocarbons CFC and halons Background - the Environmental Protection Agency under terms of a court order resulting from a lawsuit by the national Resources Defense Council against the EPA Administrator must publish in the rederal Register by December 1 1987 a proposed decision on whether there is a need need for further domestic regulations under the Clean Air Act of chemicals which deplete the stratospheric ozone layer These chemicals certain chlorofluorocarbons' CECs and halons are used for solvents refrigerants foam blowing fire ertinguising agents sterilants aerosol propellants and other miscellaneous uses Compared to other environmental laws the Act sets a low thresh- hold for required action by EPA Because of the global nature of the problem o ozone depletion however unilateral v 5 regulatory action would not be effective in protecting the ozone layer An important objective in attaining an early and effective international agreement on ozone in also to avoid disadvantages to v 5 industry resulting from unilateral v 5 1 action required by the Clean Air'Act e The v 5 has been participating in international negotiations since 1983 on this subject leading to the 1985 Vienna Convention on Protection of the Ozone Layer Negotiations on a protocol to this Convention resumed in December 1986 following intensive international scientific and economic assessments Since December -there have been two further sessions in rebruary and April 1987 and the protocol is scheduled for signing in September 1987 in Montreal The objectives for the 0 5 Government are in State Department 1 Circular 175 of Hovember 28 1986 These objectives include -i a near-term freeze on the combined emissions of the most ozone-depleting can and balon substances REVIEW AUTHORITY Adolph Eisner Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED US Department of 305327489 Date 03 03 2015 us Department of 005327489 Date 03 03 2015 -2- long-term scheduled reduction or emissions of these chemicals down to the point of eliminating emissions from all but limited uses for which no substitutes are commercially available could be as much as subject to and periodic review of the protocol provisions based upon regular assessment of science technology environmental and economic SIRE elements which could remove or add chemicals or change the schedule or the emission reduction target The Working Group on SnerQY natural Resources and the Environ- ment has considered the issue of stratospheric ozone-depletion over the past several months Attached is a paper prepared by one that summarizes the available scientific environmental economic and international data _Discussion - Since the negotiations are now reaching a stage where final positions are being proposed and due to the broad economic impact of these positions several Cabinet agencies have asked that the Domestic Policy Council review the 0 8 position and give guidance to the 0 5 negotiating team on several elements of our position prior to the next negotiations Representatives of key countries including the 8 8 will meet - on-June 29 and at subsequent sessions to discuss a suggested text attached for a control schedule prepared by the Chairman of the April negotiation sessions referred to as the Chairman s text ht that time they will address the chemicals to be covered the timing and stringency of the controls and the relationship of scientific assessments to this process Following these meetings the Council will be informed and asked for further guidance on the o s final position prior to the formal negotiating meeting on September 8 1987 and a ministerial endorsement meeting September 16-20 1987 Dre Guidance - General DPC guidance is sought on the following sauce 1 Chemical Coverage -- The 0 8 objective is to achieve the broadest coverage of major ozone depleters on a weighted basis including fully halogenated CECs and halons -- the European Community Japan and the USSR wanted only CFC ll and 12 covered but_now may agree that CPC 113 114 115 and halons could be included if DEEP in its June meeting agrees that the Convention can include them -- Options include seeking differential coverage i u reducing some and only freezing others There is support a UNCLASSIFIED US Department of 305327489 Date 03 03 2015 glFlED US Department of 005327489 Date 0 19312015 -3- 0 for treating but not reducing halons given its defense -- There is general interagency agreement on chemical coverage The negotiating team will press for the broadest attainable coverage in the freeze subject to DEC guidance 2 Stringency and Timing of Controls Relationship to Periodic Assessments Key issues are Stringency Should there be an initial freeze and tsuhseguent reductions What should the reduction levels be and in what taming and increments What would'be the probable effect on the ozone layer 0 Timing there are environmental benefits for early action to reduce further it would encourage industry to develop substitutes Given that a re- quired reduction is likely there is a need to provide time for industrial product development adjustment Some in industry prefer a definite decision and- advance notice This conflicts with those who prefer to delay positive action as long as possible 0 Relationship to periodic reassessments of scientific technological environmental and economic factors scheduled in the protocol Should we go for planned reductions subject to reversal by vote of parties after reassessment or 2 target levels to be implemented only by positive vote after reassessment or 3 no targeted reductions The Chairman's test released after the last negotiating session in April 1981 represents a possible emerging international consensus and is a convenient vehicle for review It includes Breeze at 1986 levels of production consumption or are ll 12 113 114 115 within two years after entry into force of the protocol This could happen in 1988 but the most likely E12 date is 1990 An automatic 20% reduction 4 years after 31 Likely date 1994 0 Additional 30 reduction to be implemented after scheduled reassessment with two options 1 6 years after BIB likely date 1993 if positively confirmed by majority vote of parties or UNCLASSIFIED US Department of 305327489 Date 03 03 2015 005327489 Date 03 03 2015 2 8 years after likely date 1998 unless reversed by two-thirds vote of parties 0 Additional steps down to possible eventual elimination of these chemicals for all but limited uses would be decided subsequently by parties based on periodic reassessments Questions for Dec on 5 cold 0 8 delegation seek agreement along lines of chairman's text work for greater stringency earlier impact or propose some relaration'in terms freeze lnteragency accord within 1-2 years of 812 Some prefer an earlier freeze 20% reduction Some agencies feel implementation should require positive vote of parties following a STEE reassessment in 1990 Additional 30$ reduction There is interagency disagreement Here on several elements -- Should a set level of reduction beyond the first 20% be scheduled if so at what level -- Should a second reduction be 6 years after El and be subject to a positive vote or be 8 years after El and be subject to a reversal vote or some other variant Additional reduction ate 8 Should the delegation press for further reductions as contained in the Chairman's text and Circular 175 If so at what levels and time frame Should they require a positive vote or be implemented unless there is a vote for reversal Alternatively should the process for setting reductions and timing be specified Anything beyond the Chairman's test may not be achievable 3 Control formula and Trade Provisions 1 Trade Among Parties Significant differences remain among governments over a formula for regulating controlled chemicals 0 Options include national ceilings on production production plus imports combined or separately consumption or production plus imports less exports to parties less amounts destroyed UNCLASSIFIED US Department of 005327489 Date 03 03 2015 US Department of 005327489 Date 03 03 2015 there is general interagency agreement favoring a ceiling on consumption or 'adjusted production but compromise may be needed 0 0 8 objectives include effective control of emissions with accountability fewest restriction on the flow of trade and captial among parties and most favorable formula for 0 8 industry Verification remains an issue Subject to DPC guidance the delegation will pursue these objectives and seek DPC approval of specific recommendations at a later time 3 Trade With Non Parties -- Key elements 0 General international consensus on Ban on imports of controlled chemicals in_ - bulk from non-parties No international consensus on Restrictions on exports of bulk chemicals Restrictions on imports of products containing controlled chemicals Consideration of restrictions on products made with controlled chemicals - Consideration of restrictions on export of if technology and equipment -- 0 8 objectives to regulate trade in order to encourage adherence to protocol and avoid benefits to non-parties at expense of-parties Proposals consistent with GATT -- lnteragency consensus in favor of strong trade article including trade in bulk chemicals and products that could be uniformly enforced Transfer of technology and equipment remains an issue -- Subject to guidance delegation sill pursue these objectives and seek DPC approval of specific recommendations at a later time 4 Participation -- 0 8 objective To encourage effective global control through widest possible participation by other countries UNCLASSIFIED US Department of 005327489 Date 03 03 2015 us Department of StateN I 5'19 u a UNCLASSIFIED US Department of 005327489 Date 03 03 2015 a tug 005327489 Date 03 03 2015 - l -6- Problem The less developed countries need concessions for ensentiol domestic uses to encourage adherence but exemptions must remain limited to avoid undercutting global control levels ConcessionI-being considered in the Chairman s text could double global production ceiling it fully used within the period allowed - one option entails exemption from controls for limited period for LDCs followed by adherence to the protocol Controls will be needed to restrict production in the LDCs by existing producers Related problem Hejority LDc nembership could control protocol voting to 0 8 disadvantage Should 0 8 press for weighted voting based on historic use and production levels Should elements be put into the protocol rhis issue needs more work Subject to are guidance we will refine our objectives for subsequent negotiations and later seek DEC approval of specific recommendations                     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