Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
120358382
label
First 100 Days [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
120358382
contentType
document
title
First 100 Days [2]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Council on Environmental Quality (Clinton Administration)
Kathleen McGinty's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
120358382
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7432005-20120769F-Seg1-011-006-2017
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1e81777bbb19d814
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2012-0769-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
Council on Environmental Quality
Series/Staff Member:
Kathleen (Katie) McGinty
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
2888
FolderID:
Folder Title:
first 100 Days [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
61
5
10
1
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 1
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FOR A CHANGING WORLD
I.
The Need for a New Environmental Thinking
A.
The New Environmental Reality
According to a former CEQ Chairman and two former EPA
Administrators:
1
A new environmental reality has emerged, and the
American public is demanding "less pollution and more
jobs."
The "current approach" to environmental protection "has
peaked in effectiveness" and is "no match for the
environmental and economic challenges we face."
A "whole new way of thinking about environmental
governance in the United States" that adopts "a basic
shift in emphasis from restrictions to incentives."
These environmental leaders are correct. While much has
been accomplished in environmental protection, much more is
required, and the current approach cannot deliver the desire
for less pollution and more jobs. It cannot because it is
ill-suited to the new economic reality also confronted by
our Nation.
B. The New Economic Reality
Today, the world is an integrated, interdependent global
economy. While still the largest single economy, the United
States is no longer the only economic superpower. Japan and
a uniting Europe are our equals, and other nations,
particularly in Asia, are making significant advances, which
makes the new global economy highly competitive.
In response to this changed world economy, the way American
corporations conduct business has also changed
significantly. Successful American businesses have become
leaner, flatter and faster. In the competitive global
economy, markets change rapidly and success is achieved by
those that respond promptly to customer needs. In this
world, the slow moving pyramidal, corporate structure of the
past is a dinosaur.
1 J.G. Speth, R.E. Train, D.M. Costle, "And Going for the Gold--A
National Strategy for Helping America Clean Up by Cleaning Up,"
Washington Post (October 4, 1992).
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 2
The competitiveness of the global economy is heightened at
the present time by the significant world-wide industrial
overcapacity that is set to be the defining characteristic
for this decade, just as inflation was for the 1970s and the
asset price boom was for the 1980s. 2
In industry after industry--including steel, coal,
chemicals, textiles, pulp and paper, autos, shipbuilding,
aircraft, computers, home appliances and defense--this
global overcapacity is resulting in a major industrial
restructuring.
In this painful downsizing, marginal producers will be
driven from the field. In host countries of marginal
producers, jobs will be lost, wages weakened, and tax
bases eroded.
In this restructuring, efficiency and productivity will
determine which are the marginal producers.
In any economic climate, environmental and economic goals do
not have to conflict. Environmental policy can promote or
impede efficiency and productivity depending how such
requirements are structured. Under the current approach,
however, environmental requirements are most often
impediments.
C.
The Current Environmental Approach
The current system for environmental protection has produced
a cleaner environment, although much more is required.
However, progress has been uneven with lesser problems
(e.g., [insert example]) receiving undue attention and more
important problems (e.g., [insert example]) being ignored.
In many cases, where progress has been made, the costs have
been very high for the benefit. 3
The problem with the present approach are:
1.
No vision, no priorities. Public health and
environmental protection is a stated goal of every
environmental statute--which is appropriate and
necessary. However, we have no clearly articulated,
harmonized, risk-based goals or principles to establish
environmental priorities among the many environmental
problems we face. Instead, our efforts are directed
indiscriminately at everything at once with priority
2 Richard Evans, "Why Manufacturing Assets are Facing Devaluation,"
Global Finance (July, 1992) pp. 34-39.
3 Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Quality: The Twenty-
Second Annual Report (March 1992), Table 14 at p. 234.
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 3
attention given and resources committed at any one time
to the fear or problem of the moment, which may or may
not be significant after further investigation and
reflection. By contrast, the European Economic
Community has a five year environmental action plan and
the Netherlands has a 20-year National Environmental
Plan.
2.
Media-specific, inflexible requirements. Our
environmental laws and regulations focus on particular
pollutants and sources of pollution, and the solution
of choice is a mandated, media specific end of pipe
technology. Innovative solutions based on pollution
prevention or cross-media or facility-based approaches
are simply impossible to implement, even though they
could be equivalent in environmental protection at
significantly lower costs.⁴ By contrast, our European
and Japanese competitors are given significant
flexibility in meeting environmental standards.
3.
Adversarial, conflict-based decisionmaking. The
process for environmental decisionmaking is a
legalistic, regulatory structure, with solutions to
particular problems decided in adversarial proceedings
among competing interest groups. Rarely, if ever, are
stakeholders brought into the process from the earliest
stage in an effort to produce consensus-based,
environmentally sound solutions. By contrast,
government, industry and environmental groups in Europe
and Japan work cooperatively to solve public health and
environmental problems.
4.
Duplication and turf battles. The conflict in the
process is not only among industry, government and
environmentalists, but also between the federal and
state governments and among governmental agencies. As
federal programs establish only minimum requirements,
50 state programs exist that are either redundant of or
in conflict with federal programs.
D.
The Consequences of the Current Approach
The results of this process are a very slow and complex
decisionmaking process and a very costly program for the
U.S. economy.
1.
Slow and complex decisionmaking. The choice of
technology and other decisions are based on a myriad of
engineering and environmental judgments developed
through a remote and opaque bureaucratic permitting
4
Ackerman & Stewart, "Reforming Environmental law. 13 Columbia
Journal of Environmental Law 171 (1980).
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 4
process comprehensible only to experts. The process is
slow and cumbersome and resource and paper intensive.
It is top driven rather than bottom driven, which is an
anathema in today's competitive world economy. By
contrast, permits are the exception not the rule in
other industrialized nations.
2.
A very costly program to the U.S. Economy. The costs
to the U.S. economy of environmental requirements have
not been fully characterized either in gross or cost
effectiveness terms, although it is generally
acknowledged that we lead other nations in expenditures
for pollution control.⁵ In 1990, EPA for the first
time attempted to forecast aggregate national
environmental compliance costs. The Agency estimated
that environmental costs represented about 2 percent of
Gross National Product in 1990 (about 40 percent of
defense spending) and predicted that such costs would
be about 3 percent in 1999⁶- a figure close to the 3.5
percent projected for national defense in 1997. 7 Thus,
the costs to the economy must be viewed as significant
by any measure.
3.
A example of the magnitude of costs. The cost of one
program, the Superfund program, has been intensely
studied. Originally estimated to cost $5 billion by
Congress when enacted in 1980, independent estimates
now suggest program costs of between $106 and $302
billion for Superfund and between $500 billion and $1
trillion for related remedial programs 8 a figure that
at the high estimate is 25 percent of the National
5
In 1985, the United States devoted about 1.6 percent of GDP to
pollution control; West Germany about 1.5 percent; Finland, Netherlands,
and the United Kingdom about 1.3 percent; and France about 0.8 percent.
Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Quality: The Twenty-
Second Annual Report (March 1992) at p. 59; see also "Environmentalism
Runs Riot," The Economist (August 8, 1992) p. 11 (U.S. Edition).
6 U.S. EPA, Environmental Investments: The Cost of a Clean Environment
(EPA Publication No 230-11-90-083, November, 1990). The 1999 estimate
is probably low as the 1999 estimate does not take into account the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 or coming revisions to other acts,
programs administered by other federal agencies, or potential new
programs for other problems, such as global climate change. See also
"Environmentalism Runs Riot," The Economist (August 8, 1992) p. 11 (U.S.
Edition): Editorial, "Environmental Risk," Washington Post, (March 26,
1992) at A-20.
7 Address of Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense to the Philadelphia
World Affairs Council, October 16, 1992; Editorial, Washington Post,
(April 30, 1992) at p. A-22.
8 M. Russell, E.W. Colglazier and M.R. English, Hazardous Waste
Remediation: The Task Ahead, Waste Management Research and Education
Institute, A Center of Excellence at the University of Tennessee,
Knoxville, Tennessee (December, 1991).
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 5
Debt. Notwithstanding the very significant costs,
EPA's independent Science Advisory Board ranks risks
associated with hazardous waste sites well below other
issues receiving significantly less resources. 9 In
such circumstances, the cost effectiveness of Superfund
is in significant doubt.
If we are to produce more jobs and less pollution, we must
attempt to create a new system built on cooperation and
partnership that allows more environmental protection to be
achieved at the least cost reasonably possible.
E.
An Egregious Example of Old Environmental Thinking
The counterproductive environmental and economic
consequences of the present approach to environmental
protection is demonstrated by the EPA-AMOCO Yorktown
Refinery Pollution Prevention Project.
At the Yorktown refinery, EPA and AMOCO agreed that a
facility-wide emission strategy would reduce hydrocarbon
emission currently targeted by eight separate regulatory and
statutory programs by 97 percent at one-quarter the cost of
eight single media programs.
Nonetheless, such a program was not implemented, because
EPA's current policies and its statutory authorities would
not permit the Agency to set a facility-wide emissions
reduction target and allow the company to achieve that
target any way it saw fit. 10
II. Principles for A New Thinking on Environmental Policy
While there is a growing recognition that environmental
"imperatives" may offer important economic "opportunities"
through direct sales of environmental technologies and
services, such "green opportunities" vary by region and
industrial sector. 11 Moreover, an economy the size of the
9 U.S. EPA, Science Advisory Board, Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities
and Strategies for Environmental Protection (September, 1990).
10 David Stamps, "Making a Case for Facility-Wide Compliance,"
Environmental Information Digest (October, 1992) pp. 6-9; H. Klee, Jr.
and M. Podar, Amoco-U.S. EPA Pollution Prevention Project, Yorktown,
Virginia (December, 1991, as revised, May, 1992) at p. V.
11 The global market for environmental goods and services range from
$200 to S370 billion a year, with $50 billion in international trade.
U.S. export earnings in environmental goods and services were between $6
and $8 billion in 1991. See Timothy Wirth, "Easy Being Green Lighten
Up Loggers--Environmentalism Actually Creates Jobs," Washington Post,
October 4, 1992. However, these numbers must be viewed in comparison to
the size of the U.S. economy in 1991, about $5.7 trillion, and total
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 6
United States cannot be advanced through reliance on a
strategy that relies only on "green opportunities. 12
Instead, a broader strategy promoting the competitive
advantage of American businesses must be pursued. That
strategy must allow health and environmental standards to be
achieved through the most cost-effective means reasonably
available. Our society simply can no longer afford to waste
resources through spending on environmental programs that do
not present serious problems or spending more than required
to deal with a legitimate environmental problem. Such waste
results in lost opportunities in other areas and makes our
society less able to invest in wealth generation for a
better tomorrow. The ultimate result is a lower standard of
living and less public health and environmental protection
over the longer term. 13
In promoting such a course, we are not advocating less
environmental protection. On the contrary, we agree that
environmental standards must be high. While American
business may have been resistant to environmental
initiatives in the past, that time has passed with a few
exceptions. Today, a broad spectrum of the business
community agrees that environment is an important value that
must be taken into account in business decisionmaking. 14
If our Nation is to have less pollution and more jobs, we
must change adopt the following principles in developing
environmental policy:
U.S. exports in that year, about $705 billion. Council on Environmental
Quality, Environmental Quality: The Twenty-Second Annual Report (March
1992) at p. 219; U.S. Department of Commerce, Survey of Current Business
(June, 1992) p. 60.
12 See P. Hong and D.J. Yang, "Tree-Huggers vs. Jobs: It's Not That
Simple," Business Week (October 19, 1992) pp. 108-109.
13 Professor Paul Kennedy points with clarity to the relationship
between a poor allocation of resources between wealth generation and
military power in The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, when he states
(page xvi): "[W]ealth is usually needed to underpin military power, and
military power is usually needed to acquire and protect wealth. If,
however, too large a proportion of the state's resources is diverted
from wealth creation and allocated instead to military purposes, then
that is likely to lead to a weakening of national power over the longer
term." The same is equally true with respect to domestic expenditures
and the national standard of living. If the government diverts too
large a proportion of a society's resources from wealth generation to
non-productive uses or requires wasteful expenditures, the result is a
lower standard of living (and a weaker society) over the longer term.
14 This acceptance is demonstrated by significant corporate
participation in EPA's voluntary program to reduce toxic releases to the
environment by 33 percent before 1993 and by 50 percent before 1996.
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 7
A.
Where possible we must promote consensus-based
development and implementation of environmental policy.
Standing advisory bodies--which include
representatives from industry, environmental
groups, states and local governments- be
created for each environmental regulatory program
to serve as forums for information exchange,
consensus building and advice at each stage of the
legislative and regulatory process, with funds to
support this process coming from public and private
sources.
B.
A priority-based environmental action agenda must be
established.
Environmental goals and priorities should be
established that require that the most serious
problems or problems where the most benefit can be
achieved for the least cost be attended first;
incentives should be provided for private sector
efforts to address such problems quickly and
penalties for those who procrastinate beyond legal
compliance deadlines.
Appropriations and other public funds for current
programs should be requested and spent based on
priorities established through such process.
C.
Objective risk assessments and economic analyses must
be required for every environmental issue and program,
regulate only where real risks are significant, and
require only cost-effective solutions.
Where empirical data about the nature and scope of
an environmental problem are unavailable, risk
assessments must be performed to determine its
magnitude and importance in real world terms.
Those assessments should be based on the best
scientific evidence available when performed and
routinely updated to reflect the most current data.
Accurate and complete economic analyses of the
costs and benefits to society of addressing
particular environmental problems must be routinely
performed that include alternative solutions to
problems and the cost effectiveness of each
alternative.
The public and decisionmakers need to know the
"real risks" and the "full costs" of environmental
programs so that societal resources can be
intelligently and appropriately allocated among
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 8
environmental programs and between environmental
and other programs.
D.
Wherever possible, incentive-based approaches should be
adopted that achieve health and environmental goals at
the least cost.
Wherever possible, incentives should be preferred
whenever such an approach produces equal or better
environmental benefit at a lower cost than command
and control alternatives; where laws do not permit
such an approach they should be changed.
Similarly, facility-wide approaches should also be
preferred when they produce equivalent or better
environmental at lower costs to requirements under
separate media specific programs.
Also, whenever possible, disincentives to least-
cost ways of achieving environmental goals should
be removed.
E.
Regulatory programs must be simplified and
rationalized, and, where not possible, companies must
be allowed to opt into alternative programs that
achieve equivalent or better environmental results at
lower costs.
Permitting, recordkeeping and reporting require
significant resource that add unnecessary costs and
procedural burdens that slow American response to
market conditions must be streamlined.
Pollution prevention should be promoted as an
alternative to command and control systems, where
facilities choose such a course and such an
approach can demonstrate an environmental
improvement at less cost.
F.
A harmonized, international approach must be developed
where environmental issues are global or have product
implications
Where problems are global--such as global climate
change--international solutions rather than
domestic legislation should be pursued so as avoid
competitive disadvantage to American producers and
the American economy.
With respect to products, we should pursue
international agreements to promote uniform
labeling, content and disposal requirements in
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 9
order to facilitate the free movement of products
in interstate and foreign commerce.
III. Specific Initiatives in New Environmental Thinking
In order to promote a more effective environmental program
that recognizes and balances the new environmental and
economic realties, we recommend the following initiatives:
A.
Policy and Organizational Initiatives.
1.
The President should immediately make clear that the
careful management of environmental regulatory policy
will be a focus of his Administration's economic growth
policies. Priorities should be given to promoting
growth through expanding American environmental
technologies, reducing serious health and ecological
risks and unjustified regulatory burdens, eliminating
anti-competitive distortions that disadvantage American
business in the global economy, and fostering market-
based regulatory programs where more cost-effective
than command and control schemes.
2.
Within 3 months, the President should establish one
office in the White House to coordinate the
government's environmental policy, including
development of its legislative and regulatory agendas,
general principles for risk management and
benefits/costs assessments, and national environmental
priorities, budget, and strategic plans. The office
should also be responsible for coordinating
environmental policy with other White House-level
bodies responsible for management of national security,
economic growth, and science policies. The
environmental office should have staff with exceptional
expertise in environmental issues and economic policy.
(The office could be created by expanding the existing
CEQ through transfer of staff from CEA, OMB, and EPA,
Interior, Energy and Commerce. If EPA becomes a
Cabinet Department, some of this function might be
transferred to EPA, although the White House will need
to continue to be able to coordinate inter-agency
activities.)
3.
The President should also establish an inter-agency
environmental policy work group within three months.
The workgroup should include senior political-level
officials from EPA, Energy, Commerce, Interior, State,
Justice, Health and Human Services and "ex officio"
representatives from other Cabinet and relevant
executive branch agencies. The workgroup should be
responsible for:
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 10
developing the government's general principles for
risk assessment, risk management, and benefit/cost
management;
establishing environmental priorities, budgets, and
strategic plans; and
resolving complex inter-agency disputes.
The workgroup would be staffed by the White House
environmental office.
B.
General Initiatives.
1.
Within six months, standing advisory bodies should be
established. These should include representatives from
business, environmental groups, labor, academia, and
state and local governments. There should be one
"general group.' This group would focus initially on
general principles for risk assessment, risk
management, benefit/cost assessments, benefit/cost
balancing, pollution prevention, the relative
usefulness of command/control VS. market incentives,
and development of national environmental priorities,
budgets, and strategic plans. Subsidiary bodies should
be created for air, water, waste management,
toxics/pesticides, international issues, and
federalism/enforcement/ management.
2.
In 12-18 months, the President should adopt general
risk assessment and management principles. This should
be done, first, by expediting the work of the Risk
Assessment and Management Commission created by $303 of
the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments; second, by
simultaneously requiring each concerned federal agency,
under White House supervision, to develop a generic set
of assessment/management principles, which would be
coordinated closely with the Commission's and the
general advisory group's products on the same issues.
3.
Within 24 months, the President should adopt similar
general principles for assessing benefits and costs and
balancing risk management with benefits and costs in
environmental policy decisions.
4.
Within 12 months, the President should present initial
national environmental priorities and budgets.
5.
Within 24 months, the President should present a
national environmental strategic plan for the next 5-10
years, including refined statements of priorities and a
national budget, based upon general principles and
consultation through the national advisory bodies.
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 11
C.
Legislative Initiatives.
1.
The President's original economic growth proposals
should ensure that relevant environmental issues are
carefully coordinated by providing for fast-tracking
siting and related regulatory approvals needed to
promote economic growth where possible without
compromising substantial environmental goals and by
targeting infrastructure development to reduce
substantial environmental risks and expand America's
environmental technologies base.
2.
Within the first 6-12 months, the President should
issue principles to be followed by all agencies in the
development of legislative proposals, premised upon:
Sound risk management and benefit/cost assumptions,
derived from the general principle project items
discussed above.
The national environmental priorities, budget, and
strategic plan developed through the inter-agency
workgroups and advisory body consultive process.
Review of existing programs according to the same
principles and the national priorities, budget and
plans; if existing programs do not conform to these
principles, priorities, budget and plans,
legislation should be proposed for reforms.
(m)
Within 3. months, the President should establish a
special inter-agency workgroup to develop a common
legislative agenda for reauthorizations of Superfund,
RCRA, TSCA, and the Clean Water Act to ensure that
consistent principles are used for any Administration
proposals in these programs; that remediation schemes
are based on abating serious health and environmental
risks in the most cost-effective manner, minimizing
duplicative government efforts; and that the fairest
distribution is achieved of the public and private
costs of implementing these programs. The results of
this should be produced by the early Fall of 1993.
4.
Include within the national environmental budgets and
strategic plan proposals for legislation needed to
conform agency missions to the general principles on
risk assessment, risk management, benefit/cost
management and pollution prevention.
D.
Clean Air Initiatives.
1.
Immediately prioritize the key Clean Air Act
rulemakings, review EPA's budget allocations to ensure
that funds are being spent appropriately according to
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 12
priorities, and institute negotiated rulemaking
procedures for all priority items.
2.
Accelerate EPA's review of existing Reasonably
Available Control Techniques guidances to ensure that
outdated technology and cost-effectiveness data are not
being used to determine the State Implementation Plan
revisions that are to be resolved in late 1993.
3.
Complete, but scrutinize carefully, EPA's study under
$182F, Clean Air Act on the extent of contribution of
NOₓ emissions to ozone nonattainment, to ensure that
the extent of NOₓ contribution is not overstated,
resulting in wide-spread imposition of unnecessary NOx
control limits.
4.
Accelerate the pace of EPA's general ozone modeling
reviews which will add very significant new information
on the need for additional controls on VOC and NOₓ
emissions that the states must impose under the
"Reasonable Further Progress Program."
5.
Complete EPA's revisions to its policies on new source
review to maximize efficiency in permitting new and
modified sources, concentrate on abating real emissions
problems rather than theoretical exposures based on
"design capacity" assumptions, and create incentives
for pollution prevention and control applications.
6.
To eliminate unnecessary paperwork burdens, accelerate
the rulemaking to designate chemical-specific
reportable quantity levels for air emission releases
reportable under TRI.
E.
Waste Management Initiatives.
1.
Within 6 months, EPA should complete the Superfund
Accelerated Cleanup Model (SACM) and related reform
efforts in the Superfund response program, including
the issuance of guidances on realistic land use
choices; generic, presumptive response standards; for
typical chemicals; standard, presumptive remedial
technologies; and revised risk assessment guidance.
2.
Within 6 months, EPA should revitalize the Superfund
settlement program, by routinely issuing comprehensive
PRP lists early in the site process, preparing
allocations of responsibility at multi-party sites,
offering de minimis settlement opportunities early in
the process, and using mixed funding where there are
substantial equitable problems in allocating
responsibilities.
Draft 11/17/92 11:13 AM
Page 13
3.
Within 6 months, EPA should develop proposals for
regulatory revisions to the CERCLA and RCRA programs
that will produce the most cost-effective scheme for
abating serious risks, while avoiding expensive
requirements on low-risk wastes. These revisions
should be fully concluded within 24 months.
F.
Enhancing Pollution Prevention and other Voluntary
Efforts.
Within 12 months, EPA should issue general principles
for pollution prevention in the most cost-effective
manner, tailored to abate actual risks, creating the
maximum incentives for voluntary pollution prevention
and enhanced environmental management practices.
Nov 30, 1992
TO: Team Leaders
FROM: Brooks, Tim
RE: Draft Transition Policy Recommendations
Attached is a first draft for the Green Group of the "No-Brainer"
iniatives taken from your team documents and presentations.
As you can see, it follows four packaged themes in accordance with
the decision reached at our last meeting. Large, long term priorities
are mentioned in the text but not listed as specific executive
actions. In addition, there will be an introduction to the entire
document drafted by Wednesday. This will include mention of the
forestry summit, CAFE, and NAFTA implementation as "freight train"
issues with timetables already established by Candidate Clinton. A
separate paragraph on the role of an enhanced CEQ will be submitted
to the Green Group for their decision and possible inclusion in the
document.
Two appendices have been prepared. One, to accompany this
document, lists the action, agency, and background of each specific
recommendation. The second, by agency, lists all of the policy
recommendations prepared by all of the teams. It will be submitted
to the Green Group for their consideration and direction. As you
will see, large policy initiatives are, for the most part, included in
the text. It is beyond our authority (and our abilities) to sort out
and make strategic recommendations for the entire long-term
agenda.
If you have major suggestions or criticisms, you will need to
respond immediately. Any corrections and/or additions will need to
be received, by fax or Mac disc, to Kelly at LCV by Wednesday,
midday.
We hope you like what we have put together. Thank you so much for
the long hours you have put in and the quality material you have
submitted.
**DRAFT** NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
11/30/92
1. PLAYING BY THE RULES--MAKING GOVERNMENT RESPONSIVE
AND RESPONSIBLE
The American people believe that if someone does a job, obeys the
laws, and performs the duties of a citizen, that person should not be
placed at a disadvantage by those that don't. Unfortunately, in
environmental policy, our government has too often rewarded
special interests which are uncompetitive, inefficient, or even
unwilling to obey the law. Regulations have been bent for certain
interests with particular political connections at the expense of the
public at large and those businesses which have been responsible
and innovative.
Worse, the government itself has not obeyed the rules it has laid out
for private industry. Instead of leading the way toward efficient,
competitive, innovative practices, the government has too often been
worse than the private sector in its own unwillingness to follow its
regulations, its own pollution practices, its recalcitrance to own up to
past practices.
In our nation, pollution and its consequences disproportionately
burden communities and people of lesser economic and political
means. When environmental policies intersect with deficiencies in
our national commitment to justice, our obligation is particularly
strong. We can have no higher priority than the equal treatment of
our citizens.
The Clinton-Gore Administration can lead by example, renewing the
trust in government, asserting equal treatment of private interests,
cleaning the environment by establishing federal responsibility at
least equal to that demanded of our people, and -- most importantly
-- establishing equity as a most important principle in the treatment
of our citizens.
The following commitments will not be easy or without controversy
but they are essential and immediate. To delay implementation will
encourage opposition and lead to damaging inacton.
Regulatory Review. The President-elect has already committed to
end the existing secret regulatory review process while at the same
time retaining fair, public review procedures at the White House.
Shortly after his inauguration, President Clinton should issue an
Executive Order embodying his new regulatory review process, and
setting forth the executive structure under which the new process
will be conducted. The new process should send a strong signal to
the business community and the public that laws will be enforced
with firmness and fairness, and that the regulation governing their
implementation will be prepared and reviewed with integrity and
accountability.
"Greening" the Government. The federal government is the nation's
largest employer; it is the largest purchaser, it is the worst polluter.
By its scale, it has the capability to make immediate environmental
gains for our nation. The President should lauch a comprehensive
initiative to make the federal government a leader in environmental
protection by requiring all government agencies to purchase and
procure environmentally sound products, and by initiating a
comprehensive review of the clean-up of polluted federal facilities.
Environmental Justice. The President should end the
disproportionate burden of pollution on communities of color. He
can begin by issuing an Executive Order requiring agencies to
consider the impacts of race, income, and related factors in proposed
environmental rules, planning, and budget. An interagency task
force will be necessary to oversee the initiative and it should report
annually. Agencies should target priority enforcement efforts at
communities with disproportionately high levels of chemical use or
disposal and low income or minority population.
Science and policy. Policies such as those covering wetlands,
northwest forests, endangered species, and climate should first be
firmly grounded in science before economic and political factors are
considered. The masquerade of politics for science creates terrible
environmental consequences and undermines agency morale and
public trust in the federal government.
Taken together, the preceding agenda is broad and its timetable
lengthy. Several of its most important aspects could be carried out
be Executive decisions within the first 100 days. For immediate
action, we recommend that the President--
1. Rescind Executive Orders 12291, 12498 , 12606, 12612, and
12630 which established and govern the Quayle Competitiveness
Council. In their place, the President should execute orders to create
a new open and public regulatory review charter that (a) shifts
emphasis to an affirmative agenda for more effective programs, (b)
reviews rules selectively, (c) establishes an open process for review,
(d) sets clear time limits, (e) restores decision-making authority to
agency heads, (f) faithfully adheres to law, and (g) provides for a
new, objective review staff.
2. Issue an executive order to require agencies to consider impacts
of race, income and related factors in proposed pollution rules,
planning and budget measures.
3. Issue an executive order requiring federal facilities and
contractors to comply with toxic release reporting requirements
under the Community Right to Know Act.
4. Designate the Environmental Protection Agency as the leader in
implementing the Federal Facilities Compliance Act requiring federal
facilities to comply with all pollution laws.
5. Direct an energy efficiency campaign to (a) change federal
procurement policy to increase the federal CAFE purchase
requirements from 27.5 mpg; aggressively implement the Transit
Fare Benefit Program for federal employees; (c) increase energy
efficiency of federal buildings and equipment, by directing agencies
to evaluate energy savings potential in facilities and develop
implementation plans to achieve these savings; (d) survey and utilize
cost-effective solar energy applications such as appliances and
cellular phone batteries; and (e), initiate a multi-year strategy for
procurement of renewable energy and advanced natural gas
technologies to aid in the development of new technologies through
the economies of scale.
6. Require that pollution prevention be a guiding principle in
federal procurement and require federal agencies to identify means
whereby facilities reduce solid waste, toxics, and identify
environmentally friendly alternatives to existing materials.
7. Announce a policy which would base natural resource
decisionmaking on solid science and end political interference in
scientific inquiry. As an example, the President should commit to
taking full consideration of the conclusions of the National Academy
of Science study of wetlands authorized by Congress when making
revised policy guidelines for wetlands conservation under the Clean
Water Act.
**DRAFT** NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
11/30/92
2. PROVIDING GLOBAL LEADERSHIP--KEEPING THE RIO
COMMITMENT
In the post-Cold War era, the United States must once again lead the
world. Other nations know us as a force for democracy, free
markets and in our efforts to maintain peace and security. However,
leadership in the global effort to protect of shared environment has
been left to other nations. Too often, the United States has not only
shied from leadership, it has shirked responsibility and
accountability while our neighbors stepped forward without us.
As a first step, our nation must revisit the lost opportunities of the
Rio de Janiero Conference of 1992. It was a terrible mistake to
weaken an international agreement to curb global warming. It was
irresponsible to refuse to sign the Biodiversity Treaty. Both actions
must be reversed.
Over the long term, global leadership means sharing responsibility
for restoring our oceans and our skies. Our marine policy was
severely weakened by the past two administrations and it must once
again be centered on protecting and conserving our vital coastal
resources, marine sanctuaries, and the ocean ecosystems which cover
seven tenths of the planet's surface.
Our trading policies must not reward those nations which would
damage the public health or sustainable natural resources. Both the
implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) and the ongoing GATT talks provide opportunities to
incorporate environmental protection in our economic activities.
Our nation's foreign assistance programs and those efforts of
international development institutions such as the World Bank
should operate under well understood enviromental principles which
complement our nation's domestic environmental policies, experience
and vision. Leadership within the United Nations must include a
restoration of our contribution to the United Nations Population Fund.
Global leadership includes responsible stewardship of the natural
resources within our own borders. It hypocritical to lecture less
economically advantaged nations to protect internationally
significant resources from short term gain while our nation maintains
policies which deplete or destroy similar treasures. The United
States maintains some of the earth's most important ecological areas.
The Aministration should undertake programs to identify and
protect our internationally significant ecosystems from irresponsible
development, including the nation's temperate rainforests, especially
the Ancient Forests of the Pacific Northwest and the Alaskan coast,
the Florida Everglades, the Great Lakes, the Greater Yellowstone
complex, and the unprotected desert wilderness resources managed
by the Bureau of Land Management.
There are immediate opportunities, wholly within the power of the
Executive to take global leadership. The President can reverse the
outcome of the Rio Conference with regard to global warming and
biodiversity; He can end punitive treatment of responsible
international family planning measures. He can protect this nation's
most internationally significant wilderness and wildlife resources
against short term advantages of resource development.
We propose that the President should -- within the first 100 days --
1. Announce a firm policy goal for the US of stabilization of
emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases at 1990
levels by the year 2000, and an intention to seek prompt follow-on
treaty negotioations on emissions reduction requirenents for
industrial nations. This goal should be embodied in a revised
National Action Plan under the Climate Treaty. The Action Plan
should consider innovative economic means of reducing carbon
emissions, including accelerating the use of alternative transportation
fuels, investing in intercity rail transport, and utilizing a
combination of fuel economy standards, feebates, and tax incentives
to increase average light vehicle fuel efficiency.
2. Sign the Rio Treaty on Biodiversity.
3. Repeal the Mexico City policy which bars assistance to family
planning programs abroad that use non-US funds to provide abortion
related services, counseling or information.
4. Threaten appropriate action against any nation which resumes
commercial whaling in violation of the International Whaling
Commission moratorium.
5. Issue an Executive Order under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act to remove geographic
limitations on these statutes so that U.S. agencies will follow
consistent procedures in international activities.
6. Announce his intention to seek reauthorization of a strong,
scientifically-based Endangered Species Act.
7. Direct that the federal trustees of the Exxon Valdez oil spill
settlement fund shall use the $50 million criminal restitution monies
on the acquisition of wildlife habitat in the areas affected by the spill
and that habitat acquisition will be the priority use of the federal
share of the remaining civil settlement.
8. Withdraw the 1987 development recommendation ("1002
Report") for the coastal plain of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and
announce support for wilderness legislation pending before the
103rd Congress.
**DRAFT** NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
11/30/92
SECURING A BRIGHTER FUTURE-OUR CHILDREN'S HERITAGE
For the first time, current--and future--generations of this country
may not enjoy the same quality of life as previous generations. This
loss of a basic tenent of American beliefs is deeply rooted in the
crippling national deficit. Not only does our nation suffer today
because of this huge burden of debt, it is looming as the single
largest legacy we will leave our children.
Economic troubles, coupled with disregard, even contempt, for the
health of our environment, has lead to unhealthy water and air. Our
cities, once places of wealth and achievement, are unhealthy and
dangerous. And the neglect of our parks, historic landmarks, and
wild areas may mean that future generations may never know this
country's heritage and boundless beauty.
Fortunately, many solutions to our natural resource problems will
also begin to heal the economy and control the deficit. The Clinton
Administration can curb subsidies and appropriations which degrade
our environment, drain the federal coffers, and foreclose important
new sources of revenue. Programs designed to improve our
environment will create jobs and give our current, and future, work
force badly needed skills and experience while enhancing their
appreciation for the outdoors.
For our children's sake, we must change course. New economic
initiatives must lead to permanent improvements in the quality of
life--not just a temporary jobs boost. We must quantify the
"external" environmental and public health costs associated with
energy production and consumption and encourage the development of
clean production and green factories. The budgets for R&D must be
substantially increased to foster development of new technologies
that maximize efficiency and minimize waste. Governments and
consumers alike must be given opportunities to conserve and use
renewable resources. We should prevent the destruction of our
fragile resources for unnecessary energy production. For example,
existing moratoria should be extended to prohibit oil and gas leasing
in environmentally sensitive areas of the Outer Continental Shelf.
We can simultaneously tackle our environmental and economic
problems. One way is the establishment of a new Citizens
Conservation Corps which will provide immediate environmental
restoration, as well as instilling in youth an appreciation for our
natural heritage and providing them with much-needed work
experience and a means to repay education loans.
We must change our thinking for a different world. The end of the
Cold War means new opportunities and priorities. To capitalize on
our reduced dependency on the military, the Secretary of Defense and
Secretary of Interior should enter into a Memorandum of Agreement
to screen lands on military bases due to be closed for natural values
and possible natural resource use.
Over the long term, the new Administration must radically improve
the stewardship of our public lands. Our abused and degraded
rangelands must be restored and subsidies, which encourage and
perpetuate this degradation, must be ended. Likewise, reform of the
1872 Mining Law is critical. We are giving away our federal mineral
resources and allowing our public lands to be polluted and degraded
by those profiting from this grossly outdated law.
The health of our waters--lakes, rivers, streams, and oceans--is
inexorably linked to the future of our planet. The new
Administration must work closely with congressional allies to pass
a strengthened Clean Water Act, including strong protection for
wetlands.
These actions will signal to the American people a new way of
thinking. If we are to leave a better world for our children we must
consider the impact on our natural resources in all our economic
decisions, make restoration and preservation of our parks and
historic places a priority, and place a premium on protecting our
environment for the sake of future generations.
In the first 100 days, President Clinton should:
1. Order a review and revision of the current "Principles and
Guidelines" for the preparation of federal water resources projects
reinstating environmental quality objectives, as well as economic
considerations in decision-making.
2. Order the coordination of policies between adjacent federal land
management agencies and other federal projects such as power plant
development so as to prevent degradation of national park resources.
3. Order the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to initiate
a review of National Wildlife Refuges to identify incompatible and
harmful activities and resolve or eliminate these activities and
reform adminstration of the refuge system.
4. Call upon the IWC parties at their May 1993 meeting to adopt a
permanent ban on commercial whaling while also cosponsoring the
French proposal to esablish an Antarctic Whale Sancturary.
5. Revise the existing Executive Order on "takings" to affirm the
new administration's commitment to an effective and balanced
national policy on the protection of property rights and public
resources.
6. Direct the Environmental Protection Agency to immediately
issue the proposed guidance for uniform water quality standards for
the Great Lakes.
7. Direct the Secretary of Interior to place a moratorium on R.S.
2477 "right-of-way" designations.
**DRAFT** NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
11/30/92
4. PUTTING AMERICA TO WORK -- REBUILDING OUR ENVIRONMENTAL
INFRASTRUCTURE
The American economy's need for short-term investment stimulus
can be the basis for a Federal effort to promote jobs and economic growth
and, at the same time, an unusual opportunity to set public infrastructure
spending on an environmentally sustainable course for the future.
President-elect Clinton has indicated his belief in the need for such
an investment package, and his transition advisors are already considering
possible elements for inclusion. For this reason, although we have not
included an in-depth discussion of budget priorities elsewhere in this
document, and have generally restricted our short-term recommendations
to actions that can be accomplished administratively, we have discussed
the possible elements of a "green" investment package below.
A positive infrastructure agenda can achieve dramatic gains in
environmental protection. A successful environmental investment
initiative by the Clinton/Gore Administration will put to rest the misguided
view that job creation and environmental protection are inconsistent
objectives.
To do so, the infrastructure investment package must use innovative,
incentive-based approaches to encourage smart investments and
discourage unproductive expenditures. Whether an investment is in
transportation, sewage treatment, or energy efficiency, strong federal
incentives to promote performance will not only stretch federal spending,
but will promote environmental protection.
In the last few years, many public spending programs have been
justifiably criticized for "pork barrel" spending, as increasing amounts of
taxpayer funds were spent on questionable projects. We believe that our
proposal's emphasis on performance can be used to strongly discourage
"pork barrel" spending and encourage cost-effective investments by tying
funding allocations directly to performance criteria.
In addition, we believe there are many good opportunities to create
employment by investing in our nation's natural infrastructure --
particularly in the restoration of degraded wetlands, streams and rivers.
In order to make the Clinton economic stimulus package succeed in
both economic and environmental terms, we recommend that it:
1. Invest in repairing and rebuilding the nation's highways and
bridges. Fully fund the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
of 1991 (ISTEA) for FY'93. This would require $5 billion, which should be
allocated for maintenance and rehabilitation projects in metropolitan
communities, for investments in transit, and for other authorized highway
program activities, such as interstate and bridge maintenance.
If transportation funding above ISTEA's authorized levels is
considered appropriate as an economic stimulus, we recommend that it be
directed primarily to an expanded "Rebuild and Repair Fund," and that any
funding available for new project investment be allocated according to
meaningful environmental and efficiency-based performance criteria, such
as reductions in vehicle miles travelled (VMT) per capita.
2. Invest in needed Wastewater Treatment Capacity. $2 billion
should be committed through the State Revolving Fund to begin work on
projects that have been identified as needed and ready-to-go by state
water control administrators.
3. Invest in restoring the nation's wetlands, streams, and rivers. This
could be accomplished through a variety of job-creating initiatives, such as:
fully funding the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's cooperative restoration
programs for privately-owned wetlands; accelerating the restoration of
the Kissimmee River in Florida; accelerating riparian restoration and road
decommissioning on Forest Service lands; and eliminating the backlog of
authorized mitigation projects on Forest Service and BLM lands.
4. Invest in the nation's unseen environmental infrastructure.
Expanding the Federal Government's annual investment in low-income
weatherization program by an additional $400 million would create 20,000
jobs and raise the real income of weatherized households by $125 per
household per year.
5. Set clear environmental criteria for all infrastructure investments,
and don't skirt needed environmental reviews of individual projects.
Appendix
DRAFT **NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION**
Specific Actions for the First 100 Days
of the Clinton/Gore Administration
PLAYING BY THE RULES--MAKING GOVERNMENT
RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE
This agenda is broad and its timetable lengthy. Several of its most
important aspects could be carried out be Executive decisions within
the first 100 days.
Action 1:
1. Rescind Executive Orders 12291, 12498 , 12606, 12612, and
12630 which established and govern the Competitiveness Council. In
their place, the President should execute orders to create a new open
and public regulatory review charter that:
(a) shifts emphasis to an affirmative agenda for more effective
regulatory review programs;
(b) reviews rules selectively;
(c) establishes an open process for review;
(d) sets clear time limits;
(e) restores decision-making authority to agency heads;
(f) faithfully adheres to law; and
(g) provides for a new, objective review staff.
Explanation:
The current operation of the Competitiveness Council has been to
provide a voice for ideologies opposed to regulation. It has
given industry a secrete conduit through which to petition for
favorable rulemaking, and has thwarted and intimidated agencies
responsible for drafting regulations conforming to congressional
intent. The Council has made discredited claims of economic benefits,
and the secrecy surrounding their operation has called into question
the legality of their influence on agency rulemaking. Eliminating the
Council in its current form will provide an important symbol that
special interests will no longer have preferential access to and
influence on the rule-making process.
A new regulatory review council could be called the Environmental
Efficiency Council, or the Regulatory Review Board Brooks we
need to reconcile this with the fears of OMBs reviews.
Action 2:
Issue an executive order to require all agencies to consider impacts
of race, income and related factors in proposed pollution rules,
planning and budget measures.
Explanation:
Environmental justice is a major issue facing this Nation. Too often in
the past, the enormous burden of toxic dump sites and failure to
cleanup areas has fallen on the backs of the most vulnerable
members of society; those who are too poor to fight for themselves
effectively.
Action 3:
Lift Regulatory Moratorium.
Explanation:
President Bush proclaimed a 90-day regulatory moratorium in his
State of the Union Address in January 1992 and has subsequently
extended it. It was supposedly aimed at regulations that would
impede economic recovery, and not thwart progress toward
regulatory goals and statutory deadlines. In fact the moratorium
has obstructed legitimate rulemaking, given the Council on
Competitiveness additional leverage in the rulemaking process, and
stalled many important regulations beyond statutory deadlines. The
Administration has made extravagant claims of economic benefits,
which are widely discredited. More importantly, it has sown
confusion among regulated industries who will eventually have to
comply with environmental rules. Many industries have put
pollution control investments on hold, and the uncertainty is
impeding the efficient response to environmental regulations.
Lifting the moratorium and eliminating the Council on
Competitiveness would provide more certainty (and therefor
economic efficiency) in regulated industries. Molly added.
Needs checking with DG
Action 4:
Issue an executive order requiring federal facilities and contractors
to comply with toxic release reporting requirements under the
Community Right to Know Act.
Explanation:
Private companies are required to provide annual reports on their
toxic emissions into the air, water, and land. The Federal
government's facilities should do the same. The Department of
Energy has recently agreed to do this on a voluntary basis. The
Department of Defence has not.
Action 5:
Designate the Environmental Protection Agency as the leader in
implementing the Federal Facilities Compliance Act requiring federal
facilities to comply with all pollution laws.
Explanation:
At present not all of the federal facilities comply with all pollution
laws. It is important that the new Administration is seen to be
playing fair and by the same rules we expect other businesses to
adhere to.
Action 6:
By Executive Order, direct an energy efficiency campaign to:
(a) change federal procurement policy to increase the federal CAFE
purchase requirements from 27.5 mpg;
(b) aggressively implement the Transit Fare Benefit Program for
federal employees;
(c) increase energy efficiency of federal buildings and equipment, by
directing agencies to evaluate energy savings potential in facilities
and develop implementation plans to achieve these savings;
(d) survey and utilize cost-effective solar energy applications such as
appliances and cellular phone batteries
****Brooks--the
submitted list is much longer*** ; and
(e), initiate a multi-year strategy for procurement of renewable
energy and advanced natural gas technologies to aid in the
development of new technologies through the economies of scale.
Action 7:
Issue a pollution order requiring pollution prevention be a guiding
principle in federal procurement and require federal agencies to
identify means whereby facilities reduce solid waste, toxics, and
identify environmentally friendly alternatives to existing materials.
**Brooks--this is a condensation**
Explanation:
The Federal government is one of largest generators of waste in the
Nation. By providing leadership on the important issue of waste
minimization and pollution prevention, the Government can play a
major role in stimulating innovative business solution to these
important problems.
Action 8:
Announce a policy which would base natural resource decision-
making on solid science and end political interference in scientific
inquiry. As an example, the President should commit to taking full
consideration of the conclusions of the National Academy of Science
study of wetlands authorized by Congress when making revised
policy guidelines for wetlands conservation under the Clean Water
Act.
Explanation:
During the past 12 years, the scientific basis of environmental
protection has been undermined significantly by a politization of
Science. It has reduced the public credibility of our government's
major agencies and often resulted in forcing good professionals into
unjustifiable policy positions. This was a short sighted approach to
the very real environmental problems this Nation and Earth face, and
it's time we took the best available scientific information seriously in
our policy development.
PROVIDING GLOBAL LEADERSHIP--KEEPING THE RIO
COMMITMENT
We propose that the President should -- within the first 100 days --
Action 1:
Announce a firm policy goal for the US of stabilization of emissions of
carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases at 1990 levels by the
year 2000, and an intention to seek prompt follow-on treaty
negotiations on emissions reduction requirements for industrial
nations. This goal should be embodied in a revised National Action
Plan under the Climate Treaty.
Action 2:
President Clinton should sign the Biodiversity Convention.
Explanation:
Signing the Biodiversity Convention will signal to the world that the
Clinton Administration intends to re-assert U.S. leadership on the
Environment. The Biodiversity Convention, which has already been
signed by 159 countries, is an important step toward world-wide
cooperation to stop the alarming trends of species extinction.
According to many scientists, species extinction rates are reaching
dangerous levels. The Convention is not without its problems.
However, the U.S. failed to provide leadership on this important
issue, and the result is a framework treaty which still needs to
clarify ambiguous issues of interest to the U.S. such intellectual
property rights, and funding mechanisms. The opportunity to
resolve these issues still exists in the four expert panels which will
be convened, the protocols , and in the implementing regulations for
the Convention.
Not signing the Convention would be a major missed opportunity to
show the environmental community and the world that the
Clinton/Gore Administration is taking a new, constructive approach
to conserving the worlds biological diversity. The treaty has gone on
without the U.S., it is up to the U.S. to demonstrate we are commited
to seeing the Biodiversity Convention a success by contributing to it.
Action 3:
Repeal the Mexico City policy which bars assistance to family
planning programs abroad that use non-US funds to provide abortion
related services, counseling or information.
Explanation:
The President should re-establish U.S. Leadership on the critical issue
of international population assistance. Over-population, as well as
over consumption are vital issues facing the whole planet. The U.S.
has a major responsibility which it should live up to. Reversing the
Mexico City policy is a good way to begin this process.
Action 4:
Threaten appropriate action against any nation which resumes
commercial whaling in violation of the International Whaling
Commission moratorium.
Explanation:
Contrary to public assumptions, the Whales have not been saved. In
recent years, the U.S. has abdicated its leadership in the protection of
whales. Norway announced at the last International Whaling
Commission (IWC) meeting that it would resume commercial whaling
in 1993, regardless of actions taken by the Commission. Japan has
continued to take hundreds of Minke whales in Antarctica for
"research" and commercial markets, in spite of the moratorium
prohibiting commercial whaling. The U.S. should be willing to take
serious diplomatic and if necessary economic actions to insure the
moratorium remains strong and renegade countries are brought into
compliance. If we fail to save the whales there is very little hope
for humans on this planet, and we will have denied future
generations their birthright.
Action 5:
Issue an Executive Order under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to remove
geographic limitations on these statutes so that U.S. agencies will
follow consistent procedures in international activities.
Explanation:
Both NEPA and ESA require the preparation of environmental (or
endangered species) impact statements prior to taking certain
categories of federal actions. The Reagan/Bush Administrations
limited the application of both statutes directly, and adopted the
general interpretation that U.S. laws do not apply overseas, even if
the application concerns U.S. Agency action directed in Washington.
It is our obligation under international law not to harm the natural
environment of other nations. These familiar procedures when
applied to overseas actions, would allow us to comply with that duty
in the normal course of agency planning. In the future, if we are
going to be able to help the world achieve a survivable standard of
environmental protection, these standards should also apply to all
U.S. business and industrial activities abroad. Leadership of example
by the U.S. could have a dramatic impact on the standard operating
procedures of all nations and business'.
Action 6:
Announce his intention to seek reauthorization of a strong,
scientifically-based Endangered Species Act.
Explanation:
The endangered species program of the Interior Department is the
principal program through which the United States can demonstrate
its leadership on Biodiversity to the rest of the world. Over the past
12 years, the program has been undermined by political
interference, inconsistent leadership inadequate funding and over
emphasis of economic values over extinction of species. The re-
authorization of a strong ESA will mean a better chance that future
generations will be able to witness the splendor of a spotted owl.
Action 7:
Direct that the Secretary of the Interior (federal trustees of the Exxon
Valdez oil spill settlement fund) shall use the $50 million criminal
restitution monies on the acquisition of wildlife habitat in the areas
affected by the spill and that habitat acquisition will be the priority
use of the federal share of the remaining civil settlement.
Explanation:
Many scientists and environmentalists in Alaska believe that there is
relatively little that can be done to restore the Alaskan environment
that was damaged by the spill, and that the best use of the money
obtained in the Exxon oil spill settlement would be to protect the
habitat that species affected by the spill depend on and to prevent
harmful activities that would further damage species and habitat. To
date the trustees have been unwilling to spend any of the settlement
money on acquisition, choosing instead to spend it on further studies.
Action 8:
Withdraw the 1987 development recommendation ("1002 Report")
for the coastal plain of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and announce
support for wilderness legislation pending before the 103rd
Congress.
Explanation:
The Arctic Refuge and Canada's adjoining North Yukon National Park
make up the worlds most ecologically complete and undisturbed
arctic ecosystem, an area of international significance. Proposed for
oil development by the Bush and Reagan Administrations, (by a
report submitted in accordance of Sec. 1002 of the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act), the coastal plain is the biological
heart of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the last portion of
America's Arctic Ocean coastline not available for oil development.
The U.S. Senate stripped an Arctic development provision from the
1992 Energy Act after a filibuster halted the original legislation.
Candidate Clinton pledged support for the Arctic Wilderness during
the campaign.
SECURING A BRIGHTER FUTURE--OUR CHILDREN'S HERITAGE
In the first 100 days, President Clinton should:
Action 1:
Order a review and revision of the current "Principles and
Guidelines" for the preparation of federal water resources projects
reinstating environmental quality objectives, as well as economic
considerations in decision-making.
Explanation:
The "Principles and Standards for Planning Water and Related Land
Resources" were first established in 1973 to provide a uniform
approach for preparation of water resource-related reports,
proposals, and plans for federal water development agencies. These
project evaluation procedures were revised in 1979-80, and included
important revisions to emphasize water conservation and
development of non-structural alternatives as part of project
planning. In 1983 James Watt approved new guidelines which
prescribed that "National Economic Development was the single
federal objective, eliminating "environmental quality" as a co-equal
objective, and down-grading the planning requirements from "rules"
to "guidelines".
Action 2:
Order the coordination of policies between adjacent federal land
management agencies and other federal projects such as power plant
development so as to prevent degradation of national park resources.
Explanation:
Currently National Parks suffer degradation due to activities on other
adjacent public lands, such as clearcutting and geothermal
development immediately next to the Yellowstone National Park.
These activities are causing problems within the park area. Where
possible this type of contradictory land use practice should be
avoided and better coordinated.
Action 3:
Order the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to initiate a
review of National Wildlife Refuges to identify incompatible and
harmful activities and resolve or eliminate these activities and
reform administration of the refuge system.
Explanation:
After a long series of damning reports and mounting pressure from
Congress, the Bush Administration promised to develop and
implement new standards and processes to guide management of
activities other than fish and wildlife conservation on National
Wildlife Refuges. Over two years ago, the U.S. Fish & WIldlife Service
promised new guidance to ensure that such uses are compatible with
the primary purpose of the Refuge. That guidance has yet to be
developed and clearly incompatible uses continue. Consequently,
green groups have filed law suits challenging the Service's failure to
end such incompatible uses.
Action 4:
Modify the existing Executive Order on "takings" while
simultaneously affirming the new administration's commitment to an
effective and balanced national policy on the protection of public and
individual property rights.
Explanation:
The current interpretation of what constitutes "takings" is a radically
conservative ideological view and has constrained federal agencies
from carrying-out their statutory mandates under federal laws
designed to protect the environment, public health and safety.
Action 5:
Direct the Environmental Protection Agency to immediately issue the
proposed guidance for uniform water quality standards for the Great
Lakes.
Explanation:
The Great Lakes are the world's largest freshwater ecosystem,
containing 20% of the planet's fresh water The Lakes are particularly
threatened by pollution from persistent toxic chemicals which bio-
accumulate in the food chain, persist in the environment for a long
time and cause significant damage to human health and the
environment.
The U.S. is committed by international law in the Great Lakes Water
Quality Agreement with Canada to "virtually eliminate" the discharge
of "persistent toxic chemicals" in Great Lakes waters.
The initiative has not been easy. The paper industry, the state of
Ohio and other parties have tried to discredit the the initiative.
Action 6:
Direct the Secretary of Interior to place a moratorium on R.S. 2477
"right-of-way" designations.
Explanation:
The moratorium would prevent potential roading of National Parks,
National Wildlife Refuges, and BLM wilderness study areas. The
States most effected are Utah and Alaska.
PUTTING AMERICA TO WORK -- REBUILDING OUR
ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE
In order to make the Clinton economic stimulus package
succeed in both economic and environmental terms, we recommend:
Action 1:
Invest in repairing and rebuilding the nation's highways and bridges.
Fully fund the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of
1991 (ISTEA) for FY'93. This would require $5 billion, which should
be allocated for maintenance and rehabilitation projects in
metropolitan communities, for investments in transit, and for other
authorized highway program activities, such as interstate and bridge
maintenance.
If transportation funding above ISTEA's authorized levels is
considered appropriate as an economic stimulus, we recommend that
it be directed primarily to an expanded "Rebuild and Repair Fund,"
and that any funding available for new project investment be
allocated according to meaningful environmental and efficiency-
based performance criteria, such as reductions in vehicle miles
travelled (VMT) per capita.
Action 2:
Invest in needed Wastewater Treatment Capacity. $2 billion should
be committed through the State Revolving Fund to begin work on
projects that have been identified as needed and ready-to-go by
state water control administrators.
Action 3:
Invest in restoring the nation's wetlands, streams, and rivers. This
could be accomplished through a variety of job-creating initiatives,
such as: fully funding the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's cooperative
restoration programs for privately-owned wetlands; accelerating the
restoration of the Kissimmee River in Florida; accelerating riparian
restoration and road decommissioning on Forest Service lands; and
eliminating the backlog of authorized mitigation projects on Forest
Service and BLM lands.
Action 4:
Invest in the nation's unseen environmental infrastructure.
Expanding the Federal Government's annual investment in low-
income weatherization program by an additional $400 million would
create 20,000 jobs and raise the real income of weatherized
households by $125 per household per year.
Action 5:
Set clear environmental criteria for all infrastructure investments,
and don't skirt needed environmental reviews of individual projects.
Tim, I didn't want to guess at these explainations so I will get detail
from BR tomorrow. Also many of these actions have explanations in
the Action, most importantly I'm pooped. See you soon. MO.
ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVES -- FIRST 100 DAYS
BUDGET REVISIONS????
O
Begin immediate interagency process to upgrade National Action Plan
on Climate Change; Issue Order that Plan shall result in stabilization
of emissions of CO2 at 1990 levels by the year 2000.
o
Begin international discussions (host a meeting of Parties?) on a
Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change
O
Host meeting of Parties to the Biodiversity Convention; discuss
possible amendments to facilitate US signature
Announce that U.S. will support a strong, high-level
Sustainable Development Commission at the UN to build on
commitments made at the Earth Summit
o Announce support for a Commission to monitor US progress in
implementing Agenda 21
Announce support for a strengthened United Nations Environment
Program as an effective vehicle for international collaboration of
environment agencies
Summit meeting with G77 (developing country) leaders; dialogue on
a partnership in sustainable development (public and private
development financing; technology cooperation; debt reduction; trade
reforms; link US private sector capabilities to developing country
needs).
o
Issue Directive for EPA to accelerate phaseout of ozone-destroying
chemicals pursuant to Section 606 of the Clean Air Act and in light of
November meeting of Parties to the Montreal Protocol
o Host Meeting of NAFTA Parties to Discuss Supplemental Measures on
Environmental Enforcement
Convene and Interagency Task Force through the Council on
Environmental Quality on Sustainable Development; Require report from
each Agency on UNCED follow-up
o
Introduce legislation instituting a National Environment Strategy -
- a multi-year plan of action containing measurable goals for
improving environmental performance in manufacturing, energy,
agriculture, transportation, and other sectors
O Launch a series of Roundtable Strategy Sessions with Business
leaders through the Council on Environmental Quality on Sustainable
Development; Environment and the Economy; Environmental Technologies
Convene Interagency Task Force through the Council on Environmental
Quality on Market-Based Environmental Initiatives, such as the use of
pollution taxes (work on campaign pledge to develop and implement
revenue neutral market incentives that reward conservation and
penalize polluters and energy-wasters) ; incentives to stimulate new
investment that accelerates the replacement of environmentally
burdensome products and processes; promote pollution prevention;
promote voluntary initiatives such as environemntal audits, green
labeling, recognition of progressive corporate initiatives
Eliminate Council on Competitiveness
Lift Regulatory Moratorium
End Mexico City Policy
Convene Timber Summit
Issue Recycled Commodity Procurement Directive
Create A Solid Waste Reduction Program per campaign pledge
Issue Executive Order on Federal Energy Use -- Increase Efficiency;
Increase use of Renewables to implement campaign pledge to increase
energy efficiency in every federal agency and set standards ot insure
that federal grants, contracts, and projects support conservation
goals (See here what already in the Energy Bill; how could be stepped
up in an EO)
Create a Commission (with participation of industy, federal labs,
etc.) on Energy Efficiency to implement campaign pledge to
improve overall energy efficiency by 20 percent by the year 2000; to
promote changes in utility regulation to make energy efficiency
profitable; strengthen federal programs to encourage energy efficient
housing
1994 Energy Budget revision to emphasize efficiency and renewables
O
Introduce Department of the Environment Legislation
Withdraw regulation opening National Parks to Stripmining
Launch Rebuild America initiative with focus on use of
environmental technologies
Arctic Coastal Plain Wilderness: Withdraw Interior Department
recommendation to drill under the 1002 Report EIS, or alternatively,
concede to the lawsuit that challenges adequacy of the EIS
Alaska Land Purchase Under the Exxon Settlement: Use $ now
available to Federal Exxon trustees to purchase available inholdings
and native corporation wildlife lands in the maritime province,
particularly on Afognak, Kodiak, and the Alaska Peninsula
o Wetlands: Immediately withdraw the 1991 Proposed Wetlands Manual
and refer the question of the appropriate definition of wetlands to
the National Academy of Sciences. 1987 Manual could be used in the
interim, with instruction to the Corps of Engineers and the EPA to
reconcile any differences in respective applications
o Auto Fuel Efficiency: Establish a Commission on the US Auto
Industry charged with, including other key competitiveness issues
(such as fair trade and health care costs), enhanced fuel economy
o Directive to include conservation incentives in the federal
matching fund program to implement campaign pledge to adopt
transportation strategies and highway spending programs that encourage
car-pooling and high-efficiency; high tech transportation systems and
mass transit (how add to highway bill here??)
o Directive to convert federal fleet to natural gas (per campaign
pledge -- probably should only be considered for some percentage of
the fleet) ; additional measures to expand markets for natural gas in
every sector per campaign pledge
O Reintroduce legislation to re-orient mission of federal labs to
produce enviromental technologies
o Introduce legislation on green technologies; civilian advanced
research initiative (campaign pledge)
o Order DOE assessment of priorities (begin implementation of
campaign pledge to oppose increased reliance on nuclear power; stop
spending 60 percent of budget on nuclear weapons; invest more in
development of renewable energy sources)
o Clean Water Act amendments with standards for "non-point-source"
pollution (campaign pledge)
Superfund reform (campaign pledge)
Environmental Justice Task Force
o Task force to explore establishing the initernational equivalent of
the Nature Conservancy per campaign statements
Quiet Efforts
fix EPA's budget problem
-in real terms, EPA budget today lower than 1980
wetlands reform
-advanced identification (mapping)
-categorization by value and replaceability
-banking
pollution taxes
-carbon taxes with recycling of revenues
-water effluent fees (in CWA reauthorization?)
-virgin material fees
RCRA reform
-prepare for reauthorization
-use market incentives (e.g., deposit/refund schemes)
Superfund overhaul
-attention to liability effect (enriching lawyers)
-get focus on cleanup
Clean Water Act reauthorization
-need new thinking -- especially market incentives
food safety legislation -- pesticide "registration" reform
-current program (FIFRA '88) is a failure
-need crop-wide analysis not chemical-by-chemical
-use California "Prop 65" model
-shift burden of showing safety to companies
develop a "sectoral" focus for EPA
-transportation -- implementing ISTEA
-energy -- EPA/DOE cooperation on conservation, etc.
-agriculture -- pesticide and fertilizer runoff, etc.
integrated permitting
revise National Income Accounting to reflect resource depletion
-"sustainable" GNP and GDP analysis
expand Enterprise for the Americas Initiative
environmental education -- build environmental values
-"environment in the schools" initiative
-curriculum development
develop habitat strategy
environmental labeling
-expand FTC/EPA cooperation
AID reform
-use EPA environmental expertise
-launch "environmental corps"
-broaden Peace Corps environmental focus
-build on existing EPA/Peace Corps MOU
"Environment for People" initiative
-geographic focus on eco-systems people know and love
-Grand Canyon
-Chesapeake Bay
-Jersey shore
-Puget Sound
-Great Lakes
-etc.
-establish comprehensive airshed and watershed approaches
-reorient EPA budget and staff to regional office
new EPA building
hold an EPA/state "environmental summit"
-focus on shortfalls in implementation of enviro laws
-look at state and local funding options
-develop plans for state and local "capacity building"
EPA "Futures" project public unveiling
National Environmental Goals
-launch public dialogue over priorities and programs
launch a "green data" initiative
-match data bases and capacities to environmental needs
-draw on CIA and NSA assets
Climate Change Action Program
*
lead
-voluntary CO2 reporting (using recent energy legislation)
agency.
-corporate greenhouse gas reduction program- company wide rather
-launch -issue NEPA outreach interpretation to states to on cover climate climate change effects Than just lights, the
build Environmental Leadership program
-environmental seal of approval for companies
-like the Baldridge quality awards
expand President's Environmental awards -- celebrate success
-broaden categories beyond students
-include cities, companies, groups
-focus on key themes -- e.g. pollution prevention, recycling
U.N. Sustainable Development Commission
-show interest and support
-name a high profile U.S. representative
-the Vice President?
-EPA Administrator
establish an Environmental Disaster Response Team
-ready to respond to oil spills, chemical accidents, etc.
-both domestic and international capability
support a corporate "environmental auditing" requirement
-require identification of enviro liabilities in SEC filings
announce intention to sign Biodiversity Convention
-issue interpretive statement to address:
-intellectual property protection
-biotechnology regulation
-funding mechanism
stewardship of federal lands
-manage federal lands on a truly sustainable basis
population
-reverse "Mexico City" policy
cancel plans to open ANWR
X for wast past headle some ad hos back
Carmen Surr-predic Early (USTR) Opportunities of 395-7320] end
decision making.
wop.
inaugural address -- mention environmental program
Alaska wetlands rule
climate change protocol commitment
-withdraw and revise U.S. National Action Plan
environmental equity policy statement
-outreach to key groups -- tribes, farm workers
federal recycling order (withdraw and revise existing order)
abolish the Quayle Council on Competitiveness
-restructure EPA-OMB relationship (regulatory review)
-revise and reissue Executive Order 12291
staff
Seats
on
institutionalize EPA's role in government-wide decisionmaking
-put EPA on the new DPC and EPC
NSC & ope 4
-recognize that some NSC issues require EPA participation
EPC
well
as
announce plans to elevate EPA to cabinet status
authority
as
-pursue reorganization options simultaneously
but 1° & to
elerate.
An
EPA
launch environmental technology and competitiveness initiative
to
have
-expanded technical assistance to developing countries
-build on USETI model (public/private partnership)
seat.
-use climate change country studies as a platform
companies 0-25kty
a
-develop an EPA/DOC environmental export program
-provide support for enviro technology venture fund
(depension
on
-establish "Swords to Plowshares" enviro R & D program
-EPA/DOE cooperation, esp. through National Labs
size)
-redirect DOE R & D budget
TURN over rome (one?) lab to EPA
of & # of
include environment in any infrastructure program
courses
-ensure highway projects, etc. are enviro appropriate
-include environmental infrastructure projects
Now co 10)
-combined sewer overflows
cll 20/30
-waste water treatment facilities
-set up an "environmental youth corps"
maybe # of
-urban tree planting
-riparian restoration
off pasts of
country
cut subsidies that hurt the environment
moreved.
-water
um done
-timber
-grazing
look @ ex.
in DC
-mining
frest roads instead
-oil extraction
of just helm copt
old do
(some require legislation; some dan be done by rule
overses.
commit to launching a GATT "Green Round"
DAAG Syrrist.
12-04-92.04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P001
To: Katie Mc Ginty
% Reed Hundt
From: Trey
19 pgs
* will call w/ names #
12-04-92 18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P002
ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVES -- FIRST 100 DAYS
BUDGET REVISIONS????
0
Begin immediate interagency process to upgrade National Action Plan
on Climate Change; Issue Order that Plan shall result in stabilization
of emissions of CO2 at 1990 levels by the year 2000.
Begin international discussions (host a meeting of Parties?) on a
Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change
Host meeting of Parties to the Biodiversity Convention; discuss
possible amendments to facilitate US signature
Announce that U.S. will support a strong, high-level
Sustainable Development Commission at the UN to build on
commitments made at the Earth Summit
Announce support for a Commission to monitor US progress in
implementing Agenda 21
Announce support for a strengthened United Nations Environment
Program as an effective vehicle for international collaboration of
environment agencies
Summit meeting with G77 (developing country) leaders; dialogue on
a partnership in sustainable development (public and private
development financing; technology cooperation; debt reduction; trade
reforms; link US private sector capabilities to developing country
needs).
Issue Directive for EPA to accelerate phaseout of ozone-destroying
chemicals pursuant to Section 606 of the Clean Air Act and in light of
November meeting of Parties to the Montreal Protocol
Host Meeting of NAFTA Parties to Discuss Supplemental Measures on
Environmental Enforcement
Convene and Interagency Task Force through the Council on
Environmental Quality on Sustainable Development; Require report from
each Agency on UNCED follow-up
o Introduce legislation instituting a National Environment Strategy -
-
a multi-year plan of action containing measurable goals for
improving environmental performance in manufacturing, energy,
agriculture, transportation, and other sectors
Launch a series of Roundtable Strategy Sessions with Business
leaders through the Council on Environmental Quality on Sustainable
Development; Environment and the Economy; Environmental Technologies
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P003
Convene Interagency Task Force through the Council on Environmental
Quality on Market-Based Environmental Initiativos, such as the use of
pollution taxes (work on campaign pledge to develop and implement
revenue neutral market incentives that reward conservation and
penalize polluters and energy-wasters) ; incentives to stimulate new
investment that accelerates the replacement of environmentally
burdensome products and processes; promote pollution prevention;
promote voluntary initiatives such as environemntal audits, green
labeling, recognition of progressive corporate initiatives
Eliminate Council on Competitiveness
X
Lift Regulatory Moratorium
End Mexico City Policy
Convene Timber Summit
Issue Recycled Commodity Procurement Directive
Create A Solid Waste Reduction Program per campaign pledge
Issue Executive Order on Federal Energy Use -- Increase Efficiency;
Increase use of Renewables to implement campaign pledge to increase
energy efficiency in every federal agency and set standards ot insure
that federal grants, contracts, and projects support conservation
goals (See here what already in the Energy Bill; how could be stepped
up in an EO)
Create a Commission (with participation of industy, federal labs,
etc.) on Energy Efficiency to implement campaign pledge to
improve overall energy efficiency by 20 percent by the year 2000; to
promote changes in utility regulation to make energy efficiency
profitable; strengthen federal programs to encourage energy efficient
housing
1994 Energy Budget revision to emphasize efficiency and renewables
Introduce Department of the Environment Legislation
Withdraw regulation opening National Parks to Stripmining
Launch Rebuild America initiative with focus on use of
environmental technologies
Arctic Coastal Plain Wilderness: Withdraw Interior Department
recommendation to drill under the 1002 Report EIS, or alternatively,
concede to the lawsuit that challenges adequacy of the EIS
Alaska Land Purchase Under the Exxon Settlement: Use $ now
available to Federal Exxon trustees to purchase available inholdings
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P004
and native corporation wildlife lands in the maritime province,
particularly on Afognak, Kodiak, and the Alaska Peninsula
o Wetlands: Immediately withdraw the 1991 Proposed Wetlands Manual
and refer the question of the appropriate definition of wetlands to
the National Academy of Sciences. 1987 Manual could be used in the
interim, with instruction to the Corps of Engineers and the EPA to
reconcile any differences in respective applications
o Auto Fuel Efficiency: Establish a Commission on the US Auto
Industry charged with, including other key competitiveness issues
(such as fair trade and health care costs), enhanced fuel economy
O Directive to include conservation incentives in the federal
matching fund program to implement campaign pledge to adopt
transportation strategies and highway spending programs that encourage
car-pooling and high-efficiency; high tech transportation systems and
mass transit (how add to highway bill here??)
o Directive to convert federal fleet to natural gas (per campaign
pledge -- probably should only be considered for some percentage of
the fleet) ; additional measures to expand markets for natural gas in
every sector per campaign pledge
o Reintroduce legislation to re-orient mission of federal labs to
produce enviromental technologies
Introduce legislation on green technologies; civilian advanced
research initiative (campaign pledge)
o Order DOE assessment of priorities (begin implementation of
campaign pledge to oppose increased reliance on nuclear power; stop
spending 60 percent of budget on nuclear weapons; invest more in
development of renewable energy sources)
o Clean Water Act amendments with standards for "non-point-source"
pollution (campaign pledge)
Superfund reform (campaign pledge)
Environmental Justice Task Force
o Task force to explore establishing the initernational equivalent of
the Nature Conservancy per campaign statements
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P005
fat
days
MEMORANDUM
MEMORANDUM
TO: Barry Carter
FROM: Katie McGinty
DATE: 30 October 1992
Environment Initiatives: First 100 Days
I. Domestic Initiatives -- Competitiveness
A. ACTION: The President should direct the Council on
Environmental Quality to initiate a series of roundtable strategy
sessions with the private sector to promote economically-sound
environmental strategies. The roundtables should address
specifically: sustainable development; the environment and the
economy; and strategies to develop and export U.S. produced
environmental technologies.
EXPLANATION: It is essential that the Administration reach out
to the private sector and signal a willingness to work with industry
on economically efficient environmental strategies. Through a
series of roundtable discussions, industry concerns can be
identified and incorporated in the Administration's environmental
plans. Under the coordination of the Council on Environmental
Quality, the Administration should solicit private sector input on
achieveable environmental goals and cost-effective, flexible
strategies for achieving those goals. Most importantly, economic
opportunities -- at home and abroad -- should be identified for
public-private partnership in the development and marketing of
environmentally critical technologies.
B. ACTION: Convene summit meeting with G-77 leaders to
dialogue on a partnership in sustainable development: public and
private development financing; technology cooperation; debt
reduction; trade reforms (especially Uruguay Round reforms);
matching U.S. private sector capabilities to developing country
needs.
EXPLANATION: Thirty-five percent of U.S. exports in 1991 were
to developing nations. A summit level meeting with developing
country leaders would further strengthen these important export
markets and promote sustainable economic development. Further,
such a summit would signal U.S. global environmental and economic
leadership. Finally, it could be part of a process of developing
1
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P006
Third World markets for U.S. environmental technologies.
C. ACTION: Eliminate Council on Competitiveness.
EXPLANATION: The Council on Competitiveness is chaired by the
Vice President and has seven permanent members: Secretary of the
Treasury, Attorney General, Secretary of Commerce, White House Chief
of Staff, Director of OMB, and Chairman of the Council of Economic
Advisors. It grew out of the Reagan Task Force on Regulatory Relief
(Chaired by VP Bush). Its stated purpose is to coordinate and
supervise regulatory implementation and to seek to minimize the
regulatory burden on U.S. economy.
In actual operation, the Council has provided a voice for
ideologues opposed to regulation, has given industry a secret
conduit through which to petition for favorable rulemaking, and has
thwarted and intimidated agencies responsible for drafting
regulations conforming to Congressional intent. The Council has
made discredited claims of economic benefits, and the secrecy
surrounding their operation has called into question the legality of
their influence on agency rulemaking.
Eliminating the Council will provide an important symbol that
special interests will no Jonger have preferential access to, and
influence on, the rulemaking process. The legitimate executive
function of regulatory review and coordination is vested in the
Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which must conduct its review program
with public accountability. This underscores the importance of the
OMB director and the OIRA director in maximizing regulatory benefits
and minimizing cost. These appointments are crucial to obtain a
balanced and reasonable regulatory program.
D. ACTION: Lift Regulatory Moratorium.
EXPLANATION: President Bush proclaimed a 90-day regulatory
moratorium in his State of the Union Message in January 1992, and
has subsequently extended it. It was supposedly aimed at
regulations that would impede economic recovery, and not thwart
progress toward regulatory goals and statutory deadlines.
In fact, the moratorium has obstructed legitimate rulemaking,
given the Council on Competitiveness additional leverage in the
rulemaking process, and has stalled many important regulations
beyond statutory deadlines. The Administration has made extravagant
claims of economic benefits, which are widely discredited. More
importantly, it has sown confusion among regulated industries who
will eventually have to comply with environmental rules. Many
2
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P007
industries have put pollution control investments on hold -- and the
uncertainty is impeding the efficient response to environmental
regulations.
Lifting the moratorium and eliminating the Council on
Competitiveness would provide more certainty (and, therefore
economic efficiency) in regulated industries. These actions should
be announced in a spirit of open government operations, and with
assurances that the regulatory program will be neither obstructed by
political manipulation, nor unnecessarily expanded beyond
Congressional intent. A new Administration can signal both
regulatory flexibility and responsiveness to economic concerns
without resorting to ideologically inspired shenanigans. For
example, recent rulemaking innovations such as "negotiated
rulemaking" (reg-neg) have provided industry with improved input
into the rulemaking process, and should continue.
II. Domestic Initiatives -- Energy
A. ACTION: The President should issue an Executive Order
directing federal agencies to explore opportunities for energy
efficiency improvements in federally-owned or leased buildings with
a payback period of 10 years or less. The Executive Order should
require each Department to execute five energy saving performance
contracts within one-year and to seek participation in utility
energy efficiency and water conservation programs, pursuant to the
Energy Policy ACL of 1992 (section 152 (f)). Finally, the order
should direct Departments to investigate opportunities for utilizing
renewable energy sources.
EXPLANATION: It is estimated that the Federal government
could reduce its energy costs by approximately $1 billion annually
through the installation of energy efficiency measures in its
buildings. Energy saving performance contracts and utility
rebate/incentive programs can help the Federal government finance
energy efficiency improvements at little or no initial cost. The
federal government can provide a powerful market for manufacturers
of energy efficient and renewable energy technologies, thus
encouraging the commercial viability and market penetration of
environmentally-sound energy technologies.
In April 1991, President Bush signed an Executive Order
requiring a 20% reduction in federal facility energy use from 1985
levels by 2000. Very little progress has been made toward this
goal. Section I, Subtitle F of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (HR
776) made this goal mandatory, and provided specific timetables for
agency action.
Although MR 776 requires federal action, the new Administration
3
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P008
could signal that federal energy conservation will be a high
priority by making the necessary appointments and forging
interagency agreements prior to statutory deadlines. If the actions
taken pursuant to the Energy Policy Act of 1992 are given sufficient
visibility and resources, the budget savings will begin to accrue
more rapidly.
Cost-effective investment opportunities in energy conservation
for the federal government can provide the basis for a short-run
fiscal stimulus with long-run budget savings. In particular,
accelerating investments in building energy conservation and
low-income household conservation could stimulate earnings in the
building trades and energy technology sectors. Estimates vary, but
a full spendout of cost effective investments in energy conservation
is on the order of $1 to $3 billion, which could eventually realize
up to $1 billion annually in energy savings --an attractive rate of
return.
B. ACTION: The President should direct the Secretary of Energy
to develop a strategy for improving overall energy efficiency in the
United States by 20 percent by the year 2000.
EXPLANATION: During the campaign, Governor Clinton pledged to
seek a 20 percent improvement in U.S. energy efficiency by the year
2000. This ambitious goal can only be realized through early and
coordinated action. This effort should be part of the overall
manufacturing and competitiveness strategy to ensure that energy
efficiency is given adequate attention in such areas as defense
conversion, national laboratory reorientation, manufacturing
extension program, federal housing policy, etc. This option could
be patterned after previous Presidential Council's on
Competitiveness and Sustainable Business.
C. ACTION: Order DOE reassessment of agency priorities. This
action would begin implementing campaign pledge to oppose increased
reliance on nuclear power, and to re-assess DOE mission with goal of
directing budget priorities away from nuclear weapons (currently 60%
of budget), toward more investment in renewables, efficiency, and
conservation.
EXPLANATION: Under Reagan-Bush, two-thirds of DOE'S budget and
an even greater share of its attention was focussed on the nuclear
weapons complex. Domestic energy policy was essentially nonexistant
rather, energy choices were to be determined solely on the basis
of market forces. This action item would signal that sound domestic
energy policy addressing security, economic, and environmental
concerns will be a high priority under Clinton-Gore. This can be
4
12-04-92 18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P009
done through Presidential statements, and revisions to the FY94
budget that shift some of the nuclear weapons budget (now $7.5
billion) to environmental clean-up research, domestic energy issues,
and nuclear dismantlement and proliferation. The DOE labs should be
given the mandate to become more involved in environment and energy
technology r&d efforts undertaken in concert with industry.
III. Domestic Initiatives -- Conservation and Natural Resources
A. ACTION: Convene Forest Summit.
EXPLANATION: Pursuant to a campaign pledge, the President
should convene a forestry summit within the first 100 days. The
objective of this summit must be to avoid getting trapped in the
longstanding stalemate among environmentalists, labor, industry and
Congress. Consideration should be given immediately to developing
a comprehensive strategy for the new Administration so that it has
clearly identified objectives and plans well in advance of the
summit.
B. ACTION: At the earliest possible date, the President should
direct the withdrawal of the rule proposed by the Department of
Interior (Office of Surface Mining) on July 18, 1991 that proposes
a new definition of "valid existing rights" for coal under the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA). At the same
time, the President should make clear his intention to prohibit
stripmining in U.S. National Parks, other national interest lands,
as well as private homes, businesses, schools, churches and
cemeteries, as originally contemplated in SMCRA.
EXPLANATION: During the campaign, the Bush Interior
Department's proposed rule to allow stripmining in national parks
has been severely criticized. Essentially, this proposal would
place an extremely broad interpretation on the "valid existing
rights" of coal owners, for purposes of understanding the
government's authority to protect nation, state and private lands
from being stripmined by comapanies that own coal rights underneath
parks, churches, etc. SMCRA makes the prohibition on stripmining
such lands subject to "valid existing rights."
Efforts under the Carter Administration to interpret "valid
existing rights" narrowly apply only in cases where a coal owner had
an approved mining plan as of the date of SMCRA's enactment were
struck down in the courts as overly restrictive. The proposed rule,
however, bends over backward in the other direction, relying in part
on Executive Order 12630, and presuming that a "taking" has occurred
whenever a coal owner is prevented from mining. This interpretation
could force the government to pay millions or hundreds of millions
5
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P010
of dollars in claims to prevent unacceptable damage to national and
private lands from stripmining.
C. ACTION: The President should withdraw the Interior
Department's April, 1987 recommendation to Congress to authorize an
oil and gas leasing program in the coastal plain of the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). In addition, the President should
announce his intention to develop legislation designating the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge as wilderness.
EXPLANATION: The fate of the ANWR has been a major point of
controversy between the environmental community and several major
oil companies since the debate over the Alaska National Interest
Lands Act (ANILCA) in 1980. The House version of the Alaska Lands
bill would have protected the coastal plain as wilderness; the
Senate version, which was signed into law by President Carter after
the 1980 election, mandated a study of the area and further
recommendations.
The Reagan Administration's recommendation to drill was
presented to Congress in April 1987, in the form of the Department
of Interior's "1002 Report." Highly controversial itself, the
report obscured the reservations of federal scientists concerning
the results of drilling such a fragile and wildlife-rich area, and
recommended opening the entire area to drilling. Despite this
recommendation, and strong support from both Reagan and Bush, the
100th, 101st and 102nd Congresses consistently rejected drilling
legislation.
Preservation of ANWR is one of top priorities of national
environmental organizations. Withdrawing the Interior Department's
recommendation to drill would help fulfill a campaign pledge and
help signal a new approach to national energy policy focused on
efficiency, natural gas and alternative energy resources.
IV. Domestic Initiatives -- Pollution
A. ACTION: Issue Directive for EPA to accelerate phaseout of
ozone-destroying chemicals pursuant to Section 606 of the Clean Air
Act and in light of November meeting of Parties to the Montreal
Protocol.
EXPLANATION: Section 606 gives the EPA Administrator authority
to promulgate more rapid phase-out schedules for ozone depleting
substances when warranted by new scientific evidence. Scientific
evidence released within the past 12 months warrants a more rapid
phase out of the most harmful ozone depleting subtances. The Bush
6
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN, AL GORE
TO 96372201
P011
Administration has failed to promulgate more stringent regulations
despite stating its intention to do SO. A directive to EPA will
ensure the rapid issuance of a more stringent phase-out schedule.
V. International Initiatives -- UNCED Follow-Up
A. ACTION: In order to follow-up on the non-binding action
plan (Agenda 21) established at the United Nations Conference on the
Environment and Development, the President should convene an
interagency task force, under the direction of the Council on
Environmental Quality, to define/explore the U.S. role in promoting
sustainable development. The President should also direct all
agencies of the U.S. government to develop a report detailing the
responsibilities they would/could undertake to implement Agenda 21.
EXPLANATION: At the UNCED, participating governments
negotiated a comprehensive action plan to promote sustainable
economic development. This plan, known as Agenda 21, involves
program areas that would necessarily require action by most agencies
of the U.S. government. While it is a non-binding agreement, a
high-level Sustainable Development Commission is to be established
by the United Nations this fall to measure the progress of all
nations in implementing Agenda 21. In addition, an independent
"Earth Council," is being organized by the Secretary-General of the
Earth Summit to monitor government progress in following up Agenda
21. The Earth Council is to be comprised of a world-renowned
individuals who could leverage considerable public relations
pressure on governments.
It is important, therefore, for the United States to begin
immediately developing an organized and comprehensive program for
implementing Agenda 21. As a first stop, the President should
establish an interagency task force, headed by the Council on
Environmental Quality, to define sustainable economic development at
home and abroad. To help facilitate this interagency effort, each
Department of the federal government should review Agenda 21 to
identify which proposals fall under its jurisdiction and to propose
a plan for following up on those responsibilities.
B. ACTION:
President Clinton should signal his support for
an effective Sustainable Development Commission which will be
established this fall by the United Nations General Assembly
pursuant to agreements reached at the Earth Summit. The President
should signal his support for a Commission that is given a strong
mandate, independence, and the necessary resources to promote
sustainable development around the globe.
EXPLANATION: At the United Nations Conference on Environment
1
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN, AL GORE
TO 96372201
P012
and Development, nations agreed to establish a high-level Commission
on Sustainable Development to effectively follow-up on the
conference and enhance international cooperation to promote
sustainable development. The UNCED recommended that the U.N.
General Assembly establish the Commission during its 47th session
this fall. Many expert observers believe that the Commission on
Sustainable Development is the most important outcome of the UNCED
conference. Therefore, a strong, independent entity should be
created. The Bush Administration has proposed locating the
Commission within the UN Department of Economic and Social
Development, which would reduce both the independence and
significance of the Commission.
The new President should signal his support for the Commission
to be established as an independent Secretariat of the United
Nations with authority to report directly to the Secretary General.
The European Community and the developing country alliance, the
G-77, support this position. Japan and China support the current
U.S. position. The Commission also should be encouraged to allow
more liberalized access for non-governmental organizations than
currently exist with respect to the Economic and Social Council of
the United Nations.
The Commission should have a broad mandate to review agreements
reached at UNCED and to recommend new agreements based on evolving
scientific, environmental, economic and social information. This
mandate should allow the Commission to collect information from
national governments, review progress toward funding of Agenda 21
and to recommend environmental reforms in multilateral development
assistance programs.
Representation on the Commission should be at a high-level of
government, including, at a minimum, a Ministerial-level component
of the Commission's meetings. High-level representation will ensure
that the Commission and its work are effective and respected.
In summary, the establishment of a Commission on Sustainable
Development is a critical milestone on the road from Rio. It is
essential that the Commission be well conceived and sufficiently
strong to follow up on the historic UNCED conference. The
environmental community views the proper establishment of the
Commission as a high priority.
C. ACTION: The President should establish an interagency
process to upgrade the U.S. National Action Plan on Climate Change
and issue an Executive Order stating that the U.S. Plan shall result
in the stabilization of U.S. CO2 emissions at 1990 levels by the
year 2000. In addition, the President should call for renewed
8
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN, AL GORE
TO 96372201
P013
international discussions on the Framework Convention on Climate
Change to develop binding targets and timetables for the developed
nation parties to the treaty.
EXPLANATION: Pursuant to the Framework Convention on Climate
Change signed by the United States at the Earth Summit and ratified
by the United States Senate in October, 1992, the United States is
committed to develop a national action plan aimed, at returning
manmade emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to
their 1990 levels.
At the Earth Summit, President Bush pledged to have a U.S.
action plan prepared by January 1, 1993 and urged other developed
country Parties to finalize action plans by the same date. The Bush
Administration is currently revising an earlier plan and is expected
to present its revised plan at the next meeting of the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee in December.
An executive order stating the United States' intention to
stabilize carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000
would reverse the the Bush Administration position of opposing the
establishment of firm targets and timetables when the Framework
Convention was negotiated. All other industrialized nations had
signalled a willingness to achieve the CO2 stablization goal. The
National Academy of Sciences has estimated that the United States
could reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by between 10-40 percent
at very low cost, and perhaps at a net savings. The Office of
Technology Assessment has made a similar finding. To regain the
U.S. legacy of global environmental leadership, the United States
should lead the world by committing to the stabilization of carbon
dioxide emissions.
Concurrent with a U.S. pledge to stabilize carbon dioxide
emissions, the President should urge the negotiation of a protocol
to the Convention that would establish binding targets and
timetables for greenhouse gas emission reductions. At a minimum,
the United States should seek a protocol binding all industrjalizing
countries to stabilizing carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by
the year 2000.
D. ACTION: President Clinton should overturn the Mexico City
Policy (the international version of the gag-rule) and signal a
willingness to resume funding for the United Nations Population
Fund.
EXPLANATION: Announced by the Reagan Administration at the
1984 International Conference on Population in Mexico City, the
so-called "Mexico City Policy" denies U.S. funding to private
9
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P014
voluntary organizations, such as Planned Parenthood Federation of
America, from receiving U.S. population funding if the organization
supports family planning agencies overseas that provide information
on abortion or abortion services with private, non-U.S. funds. The
policy has been implemented since 1985 without statutory authority
and remains in effect at the discretion of the President. The
Mexico City policy is not applied to foreign governments.
Overturning the policy would do nothing to alter the long-standing
prohibition on U.S. funds being used for abortion services.
Overturning the policy is a priority for population, choice and
environmental organizations and constituencies.
Also in 1985, Congress enacted the "Kemp-Kasten" amendment
which denies foreign aid funding to any organization which "supports
or participates in the management of a program of coerced abortion
or involuntary abortion." This language has been appended to every
foreign operations appropriations bill since 1985. The Reagan and
Bush Administrations have interpreted this legislation to deny
funding to the United Nations Population Fund (the principal
multilateral organization providing worldwide family planning and
population assistance) because of its program of assistance to
China.
Despite the fact that the Agency for International Development
found in 1985 that UNFPA "neither funds abortions nor supports
coercive family planning practices in its programs," the Reagan/Bush
Administrations have withheld a U.S. contribution. The United
Nations program in China is focused on improving contraceptives in
China; expanding maternal and child health programs in rural areas;
and providing training for Chinese scientists.
Each year, pro-choice members of Congress have won approval for
amendments to the foreign operations appropriations bill that would
restore funding to UNFPA. In recent years, Senator Simpson has
helped craft compromise language. Unfortunately, the Congress has
been unable to establish a veto-proof margin of support and the
UNFPA provisions have been stripped from funding bills. Restoring
funding for UNFPA need not have any budgetary impact. The President
should issue a finding declaring that UNFPA does not "support or
participate in the management of a program of coerced abortion or
involuntary sterilization." This would allow a U.S. contribution to
UNFPA. Alternatively, the President could direct AID to develop a
recommendation or appoint a commission to investigate UNFPA'S role
in the Chinese program. Finally, in his budget proposal, the
President can signal his intention to restore funding to UNFPA by
dedicating a portion of his overall population assistance request
for UNFPA.
10
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P015
E. ACTION: Request a meeting of the Parties to the
Biodiversity Convention for the purpose of discussing possible
amendments to facilitate U.S. signature.
EXPLANATION: The U.S. did not sign the Biodiversity Treaty at
the Earth Summit, claiming problems with intellectual property
protection and funding mechanisms. However, there is strong
evidence that these excuses were merely covers for another motive:
the Council on Competitiveness feared that the implementing
legislation for the Treaty would lead to a strengthened Endangered
Species Act. This action item would therefore begin a good-faith
process of negotiating amendments to the Treaty that address
legitimate U.S. concerns, allowing the U.S. to sign onto a revised,
meaningful Treaty that protects both U.S. commercial interests and
biodiversity.
*** October 1992
RE:
Upcoming
International Environmental Events
November
United Nations General Assembly. (Nov.-Dec.) This UNGA is very
important to the environmental community because international
commitment to follow-up on the Earth Summit is on the agenda.
Several items are of particular note:
Commission on Sustainable Development: The UNGA will discuss
the structure and function of the proposed Commission on
Sustainable Development beginning on November 2 and continuing
through December. In order to fulfill hopes that the
Commission will play an important role in promoting sustainable
development, it must be given a broad mandate, and a high
degree of autonomy in setting its agenda. To the maximum
extent feasible it should be made independent of the U.N.'s
Economic and Social Council which has been moribund at best.
Agencies involved: State, EPA, CEQ
Desertification: The UNGA also needs to adopt a resolution
establishing an intergovernmental negotiating committee for the
elaboration of an international convention to combat
desertification as agreed to in chapter 12 of Agenda 21. The
goal is to finalize such a convention by June, 1994. The
Administration originally opposed proposals to negotiate such
a convention, but eventually agreed to accept them. A
statement of strong U.S. support for the concept of the
Convention would likely be well-received by African nations,
although the Convention has received relatively little
attention from the U.S. environmental community. If the
11
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P016
resolution setting the negotiating process in motion is agreed
to, it is quite possible that the first meeting of the
committee would take place in the first six months of 1993.
Agencies involved: State
Climate change: The UNGA should pass a resolution extending
the mandate of, and including financial support for, the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee responsible for the
Convention on Climate Change. The INC will initiate work
identified in the Convention to be taken up by the Conference
of the Parties after the Convention's entry into force (EIF).
The INC was given this task because the Convention must be
ratified by 50 countries to enter into force and this could
take several year. The U.S. should, and it appears will,
support adoption of such a resolution. Agencies involved:
State.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Nov. 9-13, Harare) This
is the primary international body tasked with translating and
interpreting the science of climate change; the IPCC's mission is
technical, not political. The meeting will restructure the IPCC and
discuss the timing and content of the next IPCC report, scheduled
for release in 1995. A particularly important issue arises with
regard to the chairmanship of the working groups that will be set up
under the IPCC. The United States will chair one of the working
groups. The US position has been that a political appointee, rather
than a scientist, should fill that role. This position should bc
reversed. Agencies involved: State, NOAA, EPA
Antarctic Environmental Protection. (Nov. 9-20, Venice). This will
be the first meeting of the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties
since conclusion of the Protocol on the Environment which contains
a 50 plus year moratorium on commercial mineral resource activities
in the Antarctic. Two main topics will be discussed: the
establishment of a secretariat for the Antarctic Treaty System and
the regulation of tourist and NGO activities in Antarctica. The
U.S. has supported a secretariat and it appears that Argentina may
have dropped its long-standing opposition to such a move, albeit at
the price that the Secretariat be located in Buenos Aires. The
proposal for an Annex to the Protocol on the Environment protocol on
tourist and NGO activities has been greeted with scepticism by the
Administration, largely because it argues these activities are
already covered in the Protocol on the Environment. The
environmental community generally agrees with the Administration's
view. Agencies involved: State, NSF, EPA
Ozone Depletion. (Nov. 16-25, Copenhagen). The parties to the
Montreal Protocol will meet to agree to accolorated phaseout
schedules for ozone depleting chemicals, the addition of new
12
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P017
substances to be controlled (HCFCs and methyl bromide), and to
define the financial mechanism agreed to as part of the London
Amendments to the Montreal Protocol. The U.S. should support the
addition of the new substances to the control list and it appears
that it will do SO. Of some concern is the schedule for HCFC and
methyl bromide limitations which have yet to be worked out. The
U.S. is in a strong position to push for an aggressive phase-out
schedule for methyl bromide since, under the Clean Air Act, the U.S.
will have to phase out production of the substance by the year 2000.
It appears likely, however, that support for methyl bromide
reductions will coalesce around proposals to reduce production in
the year 2000 by 25 percent from 1991 levels.
With regard to the financial mechanism, some EC countries have
proposed moving the mechanism into the Global Environment Facility
of the World Bank/UNEP/UNDP. Developing countries strongly oppose
this proposal. The U.S. should support continuation of an
independent financial mechanism with the qualification that we will
evaluate its effectiveness in one or two years. There is nothing to
be gained by moving the mechanism to the GEF and such a move would
alienate the developing countries.
Finally, the parties are considering adoption of an "essential
use exemption* on the phaseout schedules. This loophole needs to be
drawn much more tightly than in the current draft text. It is not
clear at this point what definition of essential use the
Administration will advocate.
Agencies involved: State, EPA.
Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes.
(Nov. 30 - Dec. 4, Montevideo). Although the Senate has granted its
advice and consent to ratification, the United States has yet to
become a party to the Convention because the Congress did not pass
the necessary implementing legislation. As a result, the U.S. will
participate as an observer rather than a party. Several major
issues will be addressed at the meeting. First, the parties will
initiate discussions on, and perhaps agree to, technical guidelines
for meeting the Convention's requirement that hazardous waste be
managed in an "environmentally sound manner." If these guidelines
are weak, the Convention will be relatively ineffective. As the
Foreign Relations Committee urged in its report on the Convention,
the United States should support adoption of guidelines that provide
equivalent environmental protection to standards established in U.S.
law. Second, the parties will adopt rules of procedure. A key
point in these discussions for the United States will be agreement
that budgets only be adopted by consensus. Third, the Parties will
discuss whether a protocol setting forth rules and procedures for
liability and compensation for damage resulting from the
transboundary movement of hazardous waste should be negotiated.
13
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P018
Agencies involved: State, EPA
December
Global Environment Facility. (Dec. 1-4, Abidjan). The meeting will,
in theory, finalize the governing structure for the GEF. In an
optimistic scenario, the GEF could become a principal source of
funding for environmental activities in the areas of biodiversity
protection, climate change, and oceans as well as a lever to improve
the environmental "quality" of World Bank loans. In a pessimistic
scenario, the GEF would do little more than become a green cover for
continuation of business as usual at the Bank.
The U.S. should push for a transparent governance structure
which nonetheless maintains some mechanism for U.S. review of or at
least input into project approval. The U.S. should push for maximum
public access to project documentation. The Administration has been
fairly good on this.
Agencies involved: Treasury, State
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee. (Dec. 7-10, Geneva). This
meeting is intended to get the ball rolling on implementation of the
Climate Convention even though it has not yet entered into force.
One of the principal items on the agenda will be discussion of the
items tasked to the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties
(see attachment). The meeting's provisional agenda also notes that
the participants could review the adequacy of the commitments
undertaken in the Convention and recommend adoption of amendments.
This opens the door for a discussion of adopting targets and
timetables for stabilizing CO2 emissions. This will be the first
formal opportunity to advocate such measures within the Convention
framework since its signing.
At the December meeting, the United States will also present a
draft national plan to meet its obligations under the Convention.
This plan will be presented pursuant to a promise by President Bush
to have such a plan prepared by January 2.
Agencies involved: State, EPA, DOE
Follow-up Biodiversity Treaty Meetings, (Nairobi).
Other
International
Conference on Population and Development. (Sept. 5-13,
1994, Cairo).
Preparations for this Conference have already begun.
14
12-04-92 04:18PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 96372201
P019
The first preparatory meeting (PrepCom) was held in spring, 1991.
It has been followed by a series of experts and regional meetings.
The second PrepCom will take place in August of 1993 and the third
in 1994. Clearly, a new Administration will want its positions in
line heading into the second PrepCom. Moreover, the United States
will have to submit its country statement by December 31, 1992 for
presentation to the European Regional Population Conference to be
held March 23-26 in Geneva. Agencies involved: State
World Conference on Women (1995, Beijing) This U.N.-sponsored
conference follows by ten years the Nairobi Conference on women.
The conference will assess implementation of forward-looking
strategies adopted in Nairobi on peace, development, and equality.
The Congress has required a draft of U.S. report and recommendations
to be submitted in the summer of 1993.
***
15
Kathryn Tiddens
Terra Verde Trading Co are
212-925-4533
Lise Cante
40 Shaman Pharmacentrial
415-637-1800
Smokn Thomphen
CEO ESPRIT
Sandrancises.
10-30-92 FROM SEN. AL GORE
315013757914
P008
fd. - 12T/00days
from: Katie Mc6miy
Oct 30, 1192
Administration has failed to promulgate more stringent regulations
despite stating its intention to do SO. A directive to EPA will
ensure the rapid issuance of a more stringent phase-out schedule.
V. International Initiatives -- UNCED Follow-Up
A. ACTION: In order to follow-up on the non-binding action
plan (Agenda 21) established at the United Nations Conference on the
Environment and Development, the President should convene an
interagency task force, under the direction of the Council on
Environmental Quality, to define/explore the U.S. role in promoting
sustainable development. The President should also direct all
agencies of the U.S. government to develop a report detailing the
responsibilities they would/could undertake to implement Agenda 21.
EXPLANATION: At the UNCED, participating governments
negotiated a comprehensive action plan to promote sustainable
economic development. This plan, known as Agenda 21, involves
program areas that would necessarily require action by most agencies
of the U.S. government. While it is a non-binding agreement, a
high-level Sustainable Development Commission is to be established
by the United Nations this fall to measure the progress of all
nations in implementing Agenda 21. In addition, an independent
"Earth Council," is being organized by the Secretary-General of the
Earth Summit to monitor government progress in following up Agenda
21. The Earth Council is to be comprised of a world-renowned
individuals who could leverage considerable public relations
pressure on governments.
It is important, therefore, for the United States to begin
immediately developing an organized and comprehensive program for
implementing Agenda 21. As a first step, the President should
establish an interagency task force, headed by the Council on
Environmental Quality, to define sustainable economic development at
home and abroad. To help facilitate this interagency effort, each
Department of the federal government should review Agenda 21 to
identify which proposals fall under its jurisdiction and to propose
a plan for following up on those responsibilities.
B. ACTION: President Clinton should signal his support for
an effective Sustainable Development Commission which will be
established this fall by the United Nations Ceneral Assembly
pursuant to agreements reached at the Earth Summit. The President
should signal his support for a Commission that is given a strong
mandate, independence, and the necessary resources to promote
sustainable development around the globe.
EXPLANATION: At the United Nations Conference on Environment
7
10-30-92 02:35PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO
315013757914
and Development, nations agreed to establish a high-level Commission
on Sustainable Development to effectively follow-up on the
conference and enhance international cooperation to promote
sustainable development. The UNCED recommended that the U.N.
General Assembly establish the Commission during its 47th session
this fall. Many expert observers believe that the Commission on
Sustainable Development is the most important outcome of the UNCED
conference. Therefore, a strong, independent entity should be
created. The Bush Administration has proposed locating the
Commission within the UN Department of Economic and Social
Development, which would reduce both the independence and
significance of the Commission.
The new President should signal his support for the Commission
to be established as an independent Secretariat of the United
Nations with authority to report directly to the Secretary General.
The European Community and the developing country alliance, the
G-77, support this position. Japan and China support the current
U.S. position. The Commission also should be encouraged to allow
more liberalized access for non-governmental organizations than
currently exist with respect to the Economic and Social Council of
the United Nations.
The Commission should have a broad mandate to review agreements
reached at UNCED and to recommend new agreements based on evolving
scientific, environmental, economic and social information. This
mandate should allow the Commission to collect information from
national governments, review progress toward funding of Agenda 21
and to recommend environmental reforms in multilateral development
assistance programs.
Representation on the Commission should be at a high-level of
government, including, at a minimum, a Ministerial-level component
of the Commission's meetings. High-level representation will ensure
that the Commission and its work are effective and respected.
In summary, the establishment of a Commission on Sustainable
Development is a critical milestone on the road from Rio. It is
essential that the Commission be well conceived and sufficiently
strong to follow up on the historic UNCED conference. The
environmental community views the proper establishment of the
Commission as a high priority.
C. ACTION: The President should establish an interagency
process to upgrade the U.S. National Action Plan on Climate Change
and issue an Executive Order stating that the U.S. Plan shall result
in the stabilization of U.S. CO2 emissions at 1990 levels by the
year 2000. In addition, the President should call for renewed
8
10-30-92
FROM
SEN.
GORE
TO
international discussions on the Framework Convention on Climate
Change to develop binding targets and timetables for the developed
nation parties to the treaty.
EXPLANATION: Pursuant to the Framework Convention on Climate
Change signed by the United States at the Earth Summit and ratified
by the United States Senate in October, 1992, the United States is
committed to develop a national action plan aimed at returning
manmade emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to
their 1990 levels.
At the Earth Summit, President Bush pledged to have a U.S.
action plan prepared by January 1, 1993 and urged other developed
country Parties to finalize action plans by the same date. The Bush
Administration is currently revising an earlier plan and is expected
to present its revised plan at the next meeting of the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee in December.
An executive order stating the United States' intention to
stabilize carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000
would reverse the the Bush Administration position of opposing the
establishment of firm targets and timetables when the Framework
Convention was negotiated. All other industrialized nations had
signalled a willingness to achieve the CO2 stablization goal. The
National Academy of Sciences has estimated that the United States
could reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by between 10-40 percent
at very low cost, and perhaps at a net savings. The Office of
Technology Assessment has made a similar finding. To regain the
U.S. legacy of global environmental leadership, the United States
should lead the world by committing to the stabilization of carbon
dioxide emissions.
Concurrent with a U.S. pledge to stabilize carbon dioxide
emissions, the President should urge the negotiation of a protocol
to the Convention that would establish binding targets and
timetables for greenhouse gas emission reductions. At a minimum,
the United States should seek a protocol binding all industrializing
countries to stabilizing carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by
the year 2000.
D. ACTION: President Clinton should overturn the Mexico City
Policy (the international version of the gag-rule) and signal a
willingness to resume funding for the United Nations Population
Fund.
EXPLANATION: Announced by the Reagan Administration at the
1984 International Conference on Population in Mexico City, the
so-called "Mexico City Policy" denies U.S. funding to private
2
10-30-92 02:35PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 315013757914
voluntary organizations, such as Planned Parenthood Federation of
America, from receiving U.S. population funding if the organization
supports family planning agencice overseas that provide information
on abortion or abortion services with private, non-U.S. funds. The
policy has been implemented since 1985 without statutory authority
and remains in effect at the discretion of the President. The
Mexico City policy is not applied to foreign governments.
Overturning the policy would do nothing to alter the long-standing
prohibition on U.S. funds being used for abortion services.
Overturning the policy is a priority for population, choice and
environmental organizations and constituencies.
Also in 1985, Congress enacted the "Kemp-Kasten" amendment
which denies foreign aid funding to any organization which "supports
or participates in the management of a program of coerced abortion
or involuntary abortion." This language has been appended to every
foreign operations appropriations bill since 1985. The Reagan and
Bush Administrations have interpreted this legislation to deny
funding to the United Nations Population Fund (the principal
multilateral organization providing worldwide family planning and
population assistance) because of its program of assistance to
China.
Despite the fact that the Agency for International Development
found in 1985 that UNFPA "neither funds abortions nor supports
coercive family planning practices in its programs," the Reagan/Bush
Administrations have withheld a U.S. contribution. The United
Nations program in China is focused on improving contraceptives in
China; expanding maternal and child health programs in rural areas;
and providing training for Chinese scientists.
Each year, pro-choice members of Congress have won approval for
amendments to the foreign operations appropriations bill that would
restore funding to UNFPA. In recent years, Senator Simpson has
helped craft compromise language. Unfortunately, the Congress has
been unable to establish a veto-proof margin of support and the
UNFPA provisions have been stripped from funding bills. Restoring
funding for UNFPA need not have any budgetary impact. The President
should issue a finding declaring that UNFPA does not "support or
participate in the management of a program of coerced abortion or
involuntary sterilization." This would allow a U.S. contribution to
UNFPA. Alternatively, the President could direct AID to develop a
recommendation or appoint a commission to investigate UNFPA's role
in the Chinese program. Finally, in his budget proposal, the
President can signal his intention to restore funding to UNFPA by
dedicating a portion of his overall population assistance request
for UNFPA.
10
10-30-92 02:35PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 315013757914
P012
E. ACTION: Request a meeting of the Parties to the
Biodiversity Convention for the purpose of discussing possible
amendments to facilitate U.S. signature.
EXPLANATION: The U.S. did not sign the Biodiversity Treaty at
the Earth Summit, claiming problems with intellectual property
protection and funding mechanisms. However, there is strong
evidence that these excuses were merely covers for another motive:
the Council on Competitiveness feared that the implementing
legislation for the Treaty would lead to a strengthened Endangered
Species Act. This action item would therefore begin a good-faith
process of negotiating amendments to the Treaty that address
legitimate U.S. concerns, allowing the U.S. to sign onto a revised,
meaningful Treaty that protects both U.S. commercial interests and
biodiversity.
*** October 1992
RE: Upcoming International Environmental Events
November
United Nations General Assembly. (Nov.-Dec.) This UNGA is very
important to the environmental community because international
commitment to follow-up on the Earth Summit is on the agenda.
Several items are of particular note:
Commission on Sustainable Development: The UNGA will discuss
the structure and function of the proposed Commission on
Sustainable Development beginning on November 2 and continuing
through December. In order to fulfill hopes that the
Commission will play an important role in promoting sustainable
development, it must be given a broad mandate, and a high
degree of autonomy in setting its agenda. To the maximum
extent feasible it should be made independent of the U.N.'s
Economic and Social Council which has been moribund at best.
Agencies involved: State, EPA, CEQ
Desertification: The UNGA also needs to adopt a resolution
establishing an intergovernmental negotiating committee for the
elaboration of an international convention to combat
desertification as agreed to in chapter 12 of Agenda 21. The
goal is to finalize such a convention by June, 1994. The
Administration originally opposed proposals to negotiate such
a convention, but eventually agreed to accept them. A
statement of strong U.S. support for the concept of the
Convention would likely be well-received by African nations,
although the Convention has received relatively little
attention from the U.S. environmental community. If the
11
10-30-92 02:35PM FROM SEN, AL GORE
TO 315013757914
P013
resolution setting the negotiating process in motion is agreed
to, it is quite possible that the first meeting of the
committee would take place in the first six months of 1993.
Agencies involved: State
Climate change: The UNGA should pass a resolution extending
the mandate of, and including financial support for, the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee responsible for the
Convention on Climate Change. The INC will initiate work
identified in the Convention to be taken up by the Conference
of the Parties after the Convention's entry into force (EIF).
The INC was given this task because the Convention must be
ratified by 50 countries to enter into force and this could
take several year. The U.S. should, and it appears will,
support adoption of such a resolution. Agencies involved:
State.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Nov. 9-13, Harare) This
is the primary international body tasked with translating and
interpreting the science of climate change; the IPCC's mission is
technical, not political. The meeting will restructure the IPCC and
discuss the timing and content of the next IPCC report, scheduled
for release in 1995. A particularly important issue arises with
regard to the chairmanship of the working groups that will be set up
under the IPCC. The United States will chair one of the working
groups. The US position has been that a political appointee, rather
than a scientist, should fill that role. This position should be
reversed. Agencies involved: State, NOAA, EPA
Antarctic Environmental Protection. (Nov. 9-20, Venice). This will
be the first meeting of the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties
since conclusion of the Protocol on the Environment which contains
a 50 plus year moratorium on commercial mineral resource activities
in the Antarctic. Two main topics will be discussed: the
establishment of a secretariat for the Antarctic Treaty System and
the regulation of tourist and NGO activities in Antarctica. The
U.S. has supported a secretariat and it appears that Argentina may
have dropped its long-standing opposition to such a move, albeit at
the price that the Secretariat be located in Buenos Aires. The
proposal for an Annex to the Protocol on the Environment protocol on
tourist and NGO activities has been greeted with scepticism by the
Administration, largely because it argues these activities are
already covered in the Protocol on the Environment.
The
environmental community generally agrees with the Administration's
view. Agencies involved: State, NSF, EPA
Ozone Depletion. (Nov. 16-25, Copenhagen). The parties to the
Montreal Protocol will meet to agree to accelerated phaseout
schedules for ozone depleting chemicals, the addition of new
12
10-30-92 02:35PM FROM SEN. AL GORE
TO 315013757914
P014
substances to be controlled (HCFCs and methyl bromide), and to
define the financial mechanism agreed to as part of the London
Amendments to the Montreal Protocol. The U.S. should support the
addition of the new substances to the control list and it appears
that 1L will du BO. or some concern is the schodule for HCFC and
methyl bromide limitations which have yet to be worked out. The
U.S. is in a strong position to push for an aggressive phase-out
schedule for methyl bromide since, under the Clean Air Act, the U.S.
will have to phase out production of the substance by the year 2000.
It appears likely, however, that support for methyl bromide
reductions will coalesce around proposals to reduce production in
the year 2000 by 25 percent from 1991 levels.
With regard to the financial mechanism, some EC countries have
proposed moving the mechanism into the Global Environment Facility
of the World Bank/UNEP/UNDP. Developing countries strongly oppose
this proposal. The U.S. should support continuation of an
independent financial mechanism with the qualification that we will
evaluate its effectiveness in one or two years. There is nothing to
be gained by moving the mechanism to the GEF and such a move would
alienate the developing countries.
Finally, the parties are considering adoption of an "essential
use exemption" on the phaseout schedules. This loophole needs to be
drawn much more tightly than in the current draft text. It is not
clear at this point what definition of essential use the
Administration will advocate.
Agencies involved: State, EPA.
Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes.
(Nov. 30 - Dec. 4, Montevideo). Although the Senate has granted its
advice and consent to ratification, the United States has yet to
become a party to the Convention because the Congress did not pass
the necessary implementing legislation. As a result, the U.S. will
participate as an observer rather than a party. Several major
issues will be addressed at the meeting. First, the parties will
initiate discussions on, and perhaps agree to, technical guidelines
for meeting the Convention's requirement that hazardous waste be
managed in an "environmentally sound manner." If these guidelines
are weak, the Convention will be relatively ineffective. As the
Foreign Relations Committee urged in its report on the Convention,
the United States should support adoption of guidelines that provide
equivalent environmental protection to standards established in U.S.
law. Second, the parties will adopt rules of procedure. A key
point in these discussions for the United States will be agreement
that budgets only be adopted by consensus. Third, the Parties will
discuss whether a protocol setting forth rules and procedures for
liability and compensation for damage resulting from the
transboundary movement of hazardous waste should be negotiated.
12
10-30-92 02:35PM FROM SEN, AL GORE
TO 315013757914
P015
Agencies involved: State, EPA
December
Global Environment Facility. (Dec. 1-4, Abidjan). The meeting will,
in theory, finalize the governing structure for the GEF. In an
optimistic scenario, the GEF could become a principal source of
funding for environmental activities in the areas of biodiversity
protection, climate change, and oceans as well as a lever to improve
the environmental "quality" of World Bank loans. In a pessimistic
scenario, the GEF would do little more than bocome a green cover for
continuation of business as usual at the Bank.
The U.S. should push for a transparent governance structure
which nonetheless maintains some mechanism for U.S. review of or at
least input into project approval. The U.S. should push for maximum
public access to project documentation. The Administration has been
fairly good on this.
Agencies involved: Treasury, State
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee. (Dec. 7-10, Geneva). This
meeting is intended to get the ball rolling on implementation of the
Climate Convention even though it has not yet entered into force.
One of the principal items on the agenda will be discussion of the
items tasked to the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties
(see attachment). The meeting's provisional agenda also notes that
the participants could review the adequacy of the commitments
undertaken in the Convention and recommend adoption of amendments.
This opens the door for a discussion of adopting targets and
timetables for stabilizing CO2 emissions. This will be the first
formal opportunity to advocate such measures within the Convention.
framework since its signing.
At the December meeting, the United States will also present a
draft national plan to meet its obligations under the Convention.
This plan will be presented pursuant to a promise by President Bush
to have such a plan prepared by January 2.
Agencies involved: State, EPA, DOE
Follow-up Biodiversity Treaty Meetings, (Nairobi).
Other
International Conference on Population and Development. (Sept. 5-13,
1994, Cairo). Preparations for this Conference have already begun.
14
10-30-92 02:35PM FROM SEN AL GORE
TO 315013757914
The first preparatory meeting (PrepCom) was held in spring, 1991.
It has been followed by a series of experts and regional meetings.
The second PrepCom will take place in August of 1993 and the third
in 1994. Clearly, a new Administration will want its positions in
line heading into the second PrepCom. Moreover, the United States
will have to submit its country statement by December 31, 1992 for
presentation to the European Regional Population Conference to be
held March 23-26 in Geneva. Agencies involved: State
World Conference on Women (1995, Beijing) This U.N.-sponsored
conference follows by ten years the Nairobi Conference on women.
The conference will assess implementation of forward-looking
strategies adopted in Nairobi on peace, development, and equality.
The Congress has required a draft of U.S. report and recommendations
to be submitted in the summer of 1993.
***
15
pls. 1st a 100 - Drys
Issue Nine: "What is the first big National Parks/wilderness/public lands issue I will
have to face and how do I make my action into a public policy and symbolic success?"
Background: Within a month of the Inauguration, the National Park Service must
award a new 15-year contract for operation of the concessions (hotels, restaurants, gift
shops, transportation) in Yosemite National Park. The new contract, while by its terms
affecting only a single National Park, will set the direction of policies nationwide for
the next decade or more.
In his Earth Day speech, Mr. Clinton proposed to rededicate the agencies that
manage our national parks and wilderness lands to a true conservation ethic. Today,
many of our national parks are overwhelmed by traffic, smog and commercialization
(or poorly planned development) - the very problems that people seek to escape from
when they visit the parks. Moreover, concessionaires that enjoy monopolies to run
hotels, restaurants, gift shops and transportation services in the parks have been making
huge profits by paying only meager fees to the U.S. Treasury.
Opportunity: Use the new 15-year Yosemite concessions contract to launch a new
"National Parks Initiative," stressing resource protection for future generations over
private profit making and business exploitation of the National Parks.
Proposal: We recommend announcing such a new initiative with actions in two of
the Nation's flagship parks located in two important states: (1) Yosemite and (2)
Everglades. The Secretary of the Interior and the Director of the National Park Service
would (1) announce award of the Yosemite contract to a bidder committed to
environmental protection and to moving commercial services outside park boundaries
(as called for in the Service's own 1980 general management plan for the Park); (2)
announce a Federal Everglades Restoration Program designed to protect and restore
wetlands in the Park to enhance South Florida's water supply for wildlife and for urban
water users; and (3) announce the President's intention to push the Park Service to
enhance its reliance on scientifically-based management and preservation practices, as
recommended by the National Academy of Sciences in its 1992 report on the parks.
What It Would Take to Accomplish: A contract award by the Secretary of the
Interior for Yosemite can be handled administratively. For the Everglades, there would
have to be multi-year legislation and budget authorization for the Army Corps of
Engineers and the National Park Service actions in South Florida, much of which might
be keyed to Hurricane Andrew recovery efforts. The science initiative is well developed
and simply waiting for implementation by administrative and legislative action.
Timetable: The Yosemite contract award is scheduled for February 1993 and will
be in progress by December 1992. Budget planning for a Federal Everglades Restoration
Program must begin by early January.
"Bumper Sticker" Description: National Parks Are Forever.
Issue Ten: "Is there any way to defuse what may be the most politically divisive
environmental issue of the first half of my term, the reauthorization of the Endangered
Species Act?"
Background: The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the key piece of Federal
legislation for protecting natural habitats from disturbance and destruction. Because of
its strength, it is under vigorous attack by a range of interests (often including Federal
agencies themselves) whose actions nibble away at natural habitats.
In each case, there is a plausible explanation as to why this action or that permit
should be made an exception to the ESA. But such an incremental nibbling away at
habitat, each time with a "reasonable" explanation, inexorably results in the gradual
eradication of species and subspecies, any one of which may play a key rôle in an
ecosystem or provide some valuable drug or simply add to the necessary diversity and
beauty of life.
Most obsèrvers believe that the reauthorization fight will be hard fought and
emotional with powerful economic interests, who talk in seemingly concrete terms
about economic disruptions, arrayed against a group of scientists and environmentalists
whose arguments are couched in terms of possibilities, complex webs of inter-
dependence and notions of biological diversity. Although most biologists and ecologists
agree that preservation of species is the key to the preservation of biological diversity,
and common experience is that diversity is the source of ecological health, the very
foundation of our economic future, short term interests will always seek to prevail.
Opportunity: It is important that the first statement from the new Administration
sets the context within which this important debate is waged. If it is framed (as it has
been by the Bush Administration) as a question of "owls vs. jobs," the discussion will be
stacked against species preservation. However, if the Administration makes a powerful
statement from the first that the issue is biological diversity as a cornerstone of
economic health and sustainability, the terms of the discussion can be strongly
influenced in that direction.
fet territies
MEMORANDUM
MEMORANDUM
TO: Barry Carter
FROM: Katie McGinty
DATE: 30 October 1992
Environment Initiatives: First 100 Days
I. Domestic Initiatives -- Competitiveness
A. ACTION: The President should direct the Council on
Environmental Quality to initiate a series of roundtable strategy
sessions with the private sector to promote economically-sound
environmental strategies. The roundtables should address
specifically: sustainable development; the environment and the
economy; and strategies to develop and export U.S. produced
environmental technologies.
EXPLANATION: It is essential that the Administration reach out
to the private sector and signal a willingness to work with industry
on economically efficient environmental strategies. Through a
series of roundtable discussions, industry concerns can be
identified and incorporated in the Administration's environmental
plans. Under the coordination of the Council on Environmental
Quality, the Administration should solicit private sector input on
achieveable environmental goals and cost-effective, flexible
strategies for achieving those goals. Most importantly, economic
opportunities -- at home and abroad -- should be identified for
public-private partnership in the development and marketing of
environmentally critical technologies.
B. ACTION: Convene summit meeting with G-77 leaders to
dialogue on a partnership in sustainable development: public and
private development financing; technology cooperation; debt
reduction; trade reforms (especially Uruguay Round reforms);
matching U.S. private sector capabilities to developing country
needs.
EXPLANATION: Thirty-five percent of U.S. exports in 1991 were
to developing nations. A summit level meeting with developing
country leaders would further strengthen these important export
markets and promote sustainable economic development. Further,
such a summit would signal U.S. global environmental and economic
leadership. Finally, it could be part of a process of developing
1
Third World markets for U.S. environmental technologies.
C. ACTION: Eliminate Council on Competitiveness.
EXPLANATION: The Council on Competitiveness is chaired by the
Vice President and has seven permanent members: Secretary of the
Treasury, Attorney General, Secretary of Commerce, White House Chief
of Staff, Director of OMB, and Chairman of the Council of Economic
Advisors. It grew out of the Reagan Task Force on Regulatory Relief
(Chaired by VP Bush). Its stated purpose is to coordinate and
supervise regulatory implementation and to seek to minimize the
regulatory burden on U.S. economy.
In actual operation, the Council has provided a voice for
ideologues opposed to regulation, has given industry a secret
conduit through which to petition for favorable rulemaking, and has
thwarted and intimidated agencies responsible for drafting
regulations conforming to Congressional intent. The Council has
made discredited claims of economic benefits, and the secrecy
surrounding their operation has called into question the legality of
their influence on agency rulemaking.
Eliminating the Council will provide an important symbol that
special interests will no longer have preferential access to, and
influence on, the rulemaking process. The legitimate executive
function of regulatory review and coordination is vested in the
Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which must conduct its review program
with public accountability. This underscores the importance of the
OMB director and the OIRA director in maximizing regulatory benefits
and minimizing cost. These appointments are crucial to obtain a
balanced and reasonable regulatory program.
D. ACTION: Lift Regulatory Moratorium.
EXPLANATION: President Bush proclaimed a 90-day regulatory
moratorium in his State of the Union Message in January 1992, and
has subsequently extended it. It was supposedly aimed at
regulations that would impede economic recovery, and not thwart
progress toward regulatory goals and statutory deadlines.
In fact, the moratorium has obstructed legitimate rulemaking,
given the Council on Competitiveness additional leverage in the
rulemaking process, and has stalled many important regulations
beyond statutory deadlines. The Administration has made extravagant
claims of economic benefits, which are widely discredited. More
importantly, it has sown confusion among regulated industries who
will eventually have to comply with environmental rules. Many
2
industries have put pollution control investments on hold -- and the
uncertainty is impeding the efficient response to environmental
regulations.
Lifting the moratorium and eliminating the Council on
Competitiveness would provide more certainty (and, therefore
economic efficiency) in regulated industries. These actions should
be announced in a spirit of open government operations, and with
assurances that the regulatory program will be neither obstructed by
political manipulation, nor unnecessarily expanded beyond
Congressional intent. A new Administration can signal both
regulatory flexibility and responsiveness to economic concerns
without resorting to ideologically inspired shenanigans. For
example, recent rulemaking innovations such as "negotiated
rulemaking" (reg-neg) have provided industry with improved input
into the rulemaking process, and should continue.
II. Domestic Initiatives -- Energy
A. ACTION: The President should issue an Executive Order
directing federal agencies to explore opportunities for energy
efficiency improvements in federally-owned or leased buildings with
a payback period of 10 years or less. The Executive Order should
require each Department to execute five energy saving performance
contracts within one-year and to seek participation in utility
energy efficiency and water conservation programs, pursuant to the
Energy Policy Act of 1992 (section 152 (f)). Finally, the order
should direct Departments to investigate opportunities for utilizing
renewable energy sources.
EXPLANATION: It is estimated that the Federal government
could reduce its energy costs by approximately $1 billion annually
through the installation of energy efficiency measures in its
buildings. Energy saving performance contracts and utility
rebate/incentive programs can help the Federal government finance
energy efficiency improvements at little or no initial cost. The
federal government can provide a powerful market for manufacturers
of energy efficient and renewable energy technologies, thus
encouraging the commercial viability and market penetration of
environmentally-sound energy technologies.
In April 1991, President Bush signed an Executive Order
requiring a 20% reduction in federal facility energy use from 1985
levels by 2000. Very little progress has been made toward this
goal. Section I, Subtitle F of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (HR
776) made this goal mandatory, and provided specific timetables for
agency action.
Although HR 776 requires federal action, the new Administration
3
could signal that federal energy conservation will be a high
priority by making the necessary appointments and forging
interagency agreements prior to statutory deadlines. If the actions
taken pursuant to the Energy Policy Act of 1992 are given sufficient
visibility and resources, the budget savings will begin to accrue
more rapidly.
Cost-effective investment opportunities in energy conservation
for the federal government can provide the basis for a short-run
fiscal stimulus with long-run budget savings. In particular,
accelerating investments in building energy conservation and
low-income household conservation could stimulate earnings in the
building trades and energy technology sectors. Estimates vary, but
a full spendout of cost effective investments in energy conservation
is on the order of $1 to $3 billion, which could eventually realize
up to $1 billion annually in energy savings --an attractive rate of
return.
B. ACTION: The President should direct the Secretary of Energy
to develop a strategy for improving overall energy efficiency in the
United States by 20 percent by the year 2000.
EXPLANATION: During the campaign, Governor Clinton pledged to
seek a 20 percent improvement in U.S. energy efficiency by the year
2000. This ambitious goal can only be realized through early and
coordinated action. This effort should be part of the overall
manufacturing and competitiveness strategy to ensure that energy
efficiency is given adequate attention in such areas as defense
conversion, national laboratory reorientation, manufacturing
extension program, federal housing policy, etc. This option could
be patterned after previous Presidential Council's on
Competitiveness and Sustainable Business.
C. ACTION: Order DOE reassessment of agency priorities. This
action would begin implementing campaign pledge to oppose increased
reliance on nuclear power, and to re-assess DOE mission with goal of
directing budget priorities away from nuclear weapons (currently 60%
of budget), toward more investment in renewables, efficiency, and
conservation.
EXPLANATION: Under Reagan-Bush, two-thirds of DOE's budget and
an even greater share of its attention was focussed on the nuclear
weapons complex. Domestic energy policy was essentially nonexistant
-- rather, energy choices were to be determined solely on the basis
of market forces. This action item would signal that sound domestic
energy policy addressing security, economic, and environmental
concerns will be a high priority under Clinton-Gore. This can be
4
done through Presidential statements, and revisions to the FY94
budget that shift some of the nuclear weapons budget (now $7.5
billion) to environmental clean-up research, domestic energy issues,
and nuclear dismantlement and proliferation. The DOE labs should be
given the mandate to become more involved in environment and energy
technology r&d efforts undertaken in concert with industry.
III. Domestic Initiatives -- Conservation and Natural Resources
A. ACTION: Convene Forest Summit.
EXPLANATION: Pursuant to a campaign pledge, the President
should convene a forestry summit within the first 100 days. The
objective of this summit must be to avoid getting trapped in the
longstanding stalemate among environmentalists, labor, industry and
Congress. Consideration should be given immediately to developing
a comprehensive strategy for the new Administration so that it has
clearly identified objectives and plans well in advance of the
summit.
B. ACTION: At the earliest possible date, the President should
direct the withdrawal of the rule proposed by the Department of
Interior (Office of Surface Mining) on July 18, 1991 that proposes
a new definition of "valid existing rights" for coal under the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA). At the same
time, the President should make clear his intention to prohibit
stripmining in U.S. National Parks, other national interest lands,
as well as private homes, businesses, schools, churches and
cemeteries, as originally contemplated in SMCRA.
EXPLANATION: During the campaign, the Bush Interior
Department's proposed rule to allow stripmining in national parks
has been severely criticized. Essentially, this proposal would
place an extremely broad interpretation on the "valid existing
rights" of coal owners, for purposes of understanding the
government's authority to protect nation, state and private lands
from being stripmined by comapanies that own coal rights underneath
parks, churches, etc. SMCRA makes the prohibition on stripmining
such lands subject to "valid existing rights."
Efforts under the Carter Administration to interpret "valid
existing rights" narrowly apply only in cases where a coal owner had
an approved mining plan as of the date of SMCRA's enactment were
struck down in the courts as overly restrictive. The proposed rule,
however, bends over backward in the other direction, relying in part
on Executive Order 12630, and presuming that a "taking" has occurred
whenever a coal owner is prevented from mining. This interpretation
could force the government to pay millions or hundreds of millions
5
of dollars in claims to prevent unacceptable damage to national and
private lands from stripmining.
C. ACTION: The President should withdraw the Interior
Department's April, 1987 recommendation to Congress to authorize an
oil and gas leasing program in the coastal plain of the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). In addition, the President should
announce his intention to develop legislation designating the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge as wilderness.
EXPLANATION: The fate of the ANWR has been a major point of
controversy between the environmental community and several major
oil companies since the debate over the Alaska National Interest
Lands Act (ANILCA) in 1980. The House version of the Alaska Lands
bill would have protected the coastal plain as wilderness; the
Senate version, which was signed into law by President Carter after
the 1980 election, mandated a study of the area and further
recommendations.
The Reagan Administration's recommendation to drill was
presented to Congress in April 1987, in the form of the Department
of Interior's "1002 Report." Highly controversial itself, the
report obscured the reservations of federal scientists concerning
the results of drilling such a fragile and wildlife-rich area, and
recommended opening the entire area to drilling. Despite this
recommendation, and strong support from both Reagan and Bush, the
100th, 101st and 102nd Congresses consistently rejected drilling
legislation.
Preservation of ANWR is one of top priorities of national
environmental organizations. Withdrawing the Interior Department's
recommendation to drill would help fulfill a campaign pledge and
help signal a new approach to national energy policy focused on
efficiency, natural gas and alternative energy resources.
IV. Domestic Initiatives -- Pollution
A. ACTION: Issue Directive for EPA to accelerate phaseout of
ozone-destroying chemicals pursuant to Section 606 of the Clean Air
Act and in light of November meeting of Parties to the Montreal
Protocol.
EXPLANATION: Section 606 gives the EPA Administrator authority
to promulgate more rapid phase-out schedules for ozone depleting
substances when warranted by new scientific evidence. Scientific
evidence released within the past 12 months warrants a more rapid
phase out of the most harmful ozone depleting subtances. The Bush
6
Administration has failed to promulgate more stringent regulations
despite stating its intention to do so. A directive to EPA will
ensure the rapid issuance of a more stringent phase-out schedule.
V. International Initiatives -- UNCED Follow-Up
A. ACTION: In order to follow-up on the non-binding action
plan (Agenda 21) established at the United Nations Conference on the
Environment and Development, the President should convene an
interagency task force, under the direction of the Council on
Environmental Quality, to define/explore the U.S. role in promoting
sustainable development. The President should also direct all
agencies of the U.S. government to develop a report detailing the
responsibilities they would/could undertake to implement Agenda 21.
EXPLANATION: At the UNCED, participating governments
negotiated a comprehensive action plan to promote sustainable
economic development. This plan, known as Agenda 21, involves
program areas that would necessarily require action by most agencies
of the U.S. government. While it is a non-binding agreement, a
high-level Sustainable Development Commission is to be established
by the United Nations this fall to measure the progress of all
nations in implementing Agenda 21. In addition, an independent
"Earth Council," is being organized by the Secretary-General of the
Earth Summit to monitor government progress in following up Agenda
21. The Earth Council is to be comprised of a world-renowned
individuals who could leverage considerable public relations
pressure on governments.
It is important, therefore, for the United States to begin
immediately developing an organized and comprehensive program for
implementing Agenda 21. As a first step, the President should
establish an interagency task force, headed by the Council on
Environmental Quality, to define sustainable economic development at
home and abroad. To help facilitate this interagency effort, each
Department of the federal government should review Agenda 21 to
identify which proposals fall under its jurisdiction and to propose
a plan for following up on those responsibilities.
B. ACTION: President Clinton should signal his support for
an effective Sustainable Development Commission which will be
established this fall by the United Nations General Assembly
pursuant to agreements reached at the Earth Summit. The President
should signal his support for a Commission that is given a strong
mandate, independence, and the necessary resources to promote
sustainable development around the globe.
EXPLANATION: At the United Nations Conference on Environment
7
and Development, nations agreed to establish a high-level Commission
on Sustainable Development to effectively follow-up on the
conference and enhance international cooperation to promote
sustainable development. The UNCED recommended that the U.N.
General Assembly establish the Commission during its 47th session
this fall. Many expert observers believe that the Commission on
Sustainable Development is the most important outcome of the UNCED
conference. Therefore, a strong, independent entity should be
created. The Bush Administration has proposed locating the
Commission within the UN Department of Economic and Social
Development, which would reduce both the independence and
significance of the Commission.
The new President should signal his support for the Commission
to be established as an independent Secretariat of the United
Nations with authority to report directly to the Secretary General.
The European Community and the developing country alliance, the
G-77, support this position. Japan and China support the current
U.S. position. The Commission also should be encouraged to allow
more liberalized access for non-governmental organizations than
currently exist with respect to the Economic and Social Council of
the United Nations.
The Commission should have a broad mandate to review agreements
reached at UNCED and to recommend new agreements based on evolving
scientific, environmental, economic and social information. This
mandate should allow the Commission to collect information from
national governments, review progress toward funding of Agenda 21
and to recommend environmental reforms in multilateral development
assistance programs.
Representation on the Commission should be at a high-level of
government, including, at a minimum, a Ministerial-level component
of the Commission's meetings. High-level representation will ensure
that the Commission and its work are effective and respected.
In summary, the establishment of a Commission on Sustainable
Development is a critical milestone on the road from Rio. It is
essential that the Commission be well conceived and sufficiently
strong to follow up on the historic UNCED conference. The
environmental community views the proper establishment of the
Commission as a high priority.
C. ACTION: The President should establish an interagency
process to upgrade the U.S. National Action Plan on Climate Change
and issue an Executive Order stating that the U.S. Plan shall result
in the stabilization of U.S. CO2 emissions at 1990 levels by the
year 2000. In addition, the President should call for renewed
8
international discussions on the Framework Convention on Climate
Change to develop binding targets and timetables for the developed
nation parties to the treaty.
EXPLANATION: Pursuant to the Framework Convention on Climate
Change signed by the United States at the Earth Summit and ratified
by the United States Senate in October, 1992, the United States is
committed to develop a national action plan aimed at returning
manmade emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to
their 1990 levels.
At the Earth Summit, President Bush pledged to have a U.S.
action plan prepared by January 1, 1993 and urged other developed
country Parties to finalize action plans by the same date. The Bush
Administration is currently revising an earlier plan and is expected
to present its revised plan at the next meeting of the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee in December.
An executive order stating the United States' intention to
stabilize carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000
would reverse the the Bush Administration position of opposing the
establishment of firm targets and timetables when the Framework
Convention was negotiated. All other industrialized nations had
signalled a willingness to achieve the CO2 stablization goal. The
National Academy of Sciences has estimated that the United States
could reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by between 10-40 percent
at very low cost, and perhaps at a net savings. The Office of
Technology Assessment has made a similar finding. To regain the
U.S. legacy of global environmental leadership, the United States
should lead the world by committing to the stabilization of carbon
dioxide emissions.
Concurrent with a U.S. pledge to stabilize carbon dioxide
emissions, the President should urge the negotiation of a protocol
to the Convention that would establish binding targets and
timetables for greenhouse gas emission reductions. At a minimum,
the United States should seek a protocol binding all industrializing
countries to stabilizing carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by
the year 2000.
D. ACTION: President Clinton should overturn the Mexico City
Policy (the international version of the gag-rule) and signal a
willingness to resume funding for the United Nations Population
Fund.
EXPLANATION: Announced by the Reagan Administration at the
1984 International Conference on Population in Mexico City, the
so-called "Mexico City Policy" denies U.S. funding to private
9
voluntary organizations, such as Planned Parenthood Federation of
America, from receiving U.S. population funding if the organization
supports family planning agencies overseas that provide information
on abortion or abortion services with private, non-U.S. funds. The
policy has been implemented since 1985 without statutory authority
and remains in effect at the discretion of the President. The
Mexico City policy is not applied to foreign governments.
Overturning the policy would do nothing to alter the long-standing
prohibition on U.S. funds being used for abortion services.
Overturning the policy is a priority for population, choice and
environmental organizations and constituencies.
Also in 1985, Congress enacted the "Kemp-Kasten" amendment
which denies foreign aid funding to any organization which "supports
or participates in the management of a program of coerced abortion
or involuntary abortion." This language has been appended to every
foreign operations appropriations bill since 1985. The Reagan and
Bush Administrations have interpreted this legislation to deny
funding to the United Nations Population Fund (the principal
multilateral organization providing worldwide family planning and
population assistance) because of its program of assistance to
China.
Despite the fact that the Agency for International Development
found in 1985 that UNFPA "neither funds abortions nor supports
coercive family planning practices in its programs," the Reagan/Bush
Administrations have withheld a U.S. contribution. The United
Nations program in China is focused on improving contraceptives in
China; expanding maternal and child health programs in rural areas;
and providing training for Chinese scientists.
Each year, pro-choice members of Congress have won approval for
amendments to the foreign operations appropriations bill that would
restore funding to UNFPA. In recent years, Senator Simpson has
helped craft compromise language. Unfortunately, the Congress has
been unable to establish a veto-proof margin of support and the
UNFPA provisions have been stripped from funding bills. Restoring
funding for UNFPA need not have any budgetary impact. The President
should issue a finding declaring that UNFPA does not "support or
participate in the management of a program of coerced abortion or
involuntary sterilization. This would allow a U.S. contribution to
UNFPA. Alternatively, the President could direct AID to develop a
recommendation or appoint a commission to investigate UNFPA's role
in the Chinese program. Finally, in his budget proposal, the
President can signal his intention to restore funding to UNFPA by
dedicating a portion of his overall population assistance request
for UNFPA.
10
E. ACTION: Request a meeting of the Parties to the
Biodiversity Convention for the purpose of discussing possible
amendments to facilitate U.S. signature.
EXPLANATION: The U.S. did not sign the Biodiversity Treaty at
the Earth Summit, claiming problems with intellectual property
protection and funding mechanisms. However, there is strong
evidence that these excuses were merely covers for another motive:
the Council on Competitiveness feared that the implementing
legislation for the Treaty would lead to a strengthened Endangered
Species Act. This action item would therefore begin a good-faith
process of negotiating amendments to the Treaty that address
legitimate U.S. concerns, allowing the U.S. to sign onto a revised,
meaningful Treaty that protects both U.S. commercial interests and
biodiversity.
*** October 1992
RE: Upcoming International Environmental Events
November
United Nations General Assembly. (Nov.-Dec.) This UNGA is very
important to the environmental community because international
commitment to follow-up on the Earth Summit is on the agenda.
Several items are of particular note:
Commission on Sustainable Development: The UNGA will discuss
the structure and function of the proposed Commission on
Sustainable Development beginning on November 2 and continuing
through December. In order to fulfill hopes that the
Commission will play an important role in promoting sustainable
development, it must be given a broad mandate, and a high
degree of autonomy in setting its agenda. To the maximum
extent feasible it should be made independent of the U.N.'s
Economic and Social Council which has been moribund at best.
Agencies involved: State, EPA, CEQ
Desertification: The UNGA also needs to adopt a resolution
establishing an intergovernmental negotiating committee for the
elaboration of an international convention to combat
desertification as agreed to in chapter 12 of Agenda 21. The
goal is to finalize such a convention by June, 1994. The
Administration originally opposed proposals to negotiate such
a convention, but eventually agreed to accept them. A
statement of strong U.S. support for the concept of the
Convention would likely be well-received by African nations,
although the Convention has received relatively little
attention from the U.S. environmental community. If the
11
resolution setting the negotiating process in motion is agreed
to, it is quite possible that the first meeting of the
committee would take place in the first six months of 1993.
Agencies involved: State
Climate change: The UNGA should pass a resolution extending
the mandate of, and including financial support for, the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee responsible for the
Convention on Climate Change. The INC will initiate work
identified in the Convention to be taken up by the Conference
of the Parties after the Convention's entry into force (EIF).
The INC was given this task because the Convention must be
ratified by 50 countries to enter into force and this could
take several year. The U.S. should, and it appears will,
support adoption of such a resolution. Agencies involved:
State.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Nov. 9-13, Harare) This
is the primary international body tasked with translating and
interpreting the science of climate change; the IPCC's mission is
technical, not political. The meeting will restructure the IPCC and
discuss the timing and content of the next IPCC report, scheduled
for release in 1995. A particularly important issue arises with
regard to the chairmanship of the working groups that will be set up
under the IPCC. The United States will chair one of the working
groups. The US position has been that a political appointee, rather
than a scientist, should fill that role. This position should be
reversed. Agencies involved: State, NOAA, EPA
Antarctic Environmental Protection. (Nov. 9-20, Venice). This will
be the first meeting of the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties
since conclusion of the Protocol on the Environment which contains
a 50 plus year moratorium on commercial mineral resource activities
in the Antarctic. Two main topics will be discussed: the
establishment of a secretariat for the Antarctic Treaty System and
the regulation of tourist and NGO activities in Antarctica. The
U.S. has supported a secretariat and it appears that Argentina may
have dropped its long-standing opposition to such a move, albeit at
the price that the Secretariat be located in Buenos Aires. The
proposal for an Annex to the Protocol on the Environment protocol on
tourist and NGO activities has been greeted with scepticism by the
Administration, largely because it argues these activities are
already covered in the Protocol on the Environment. The
environmental community generally agrees with the Administration's
view. Agencies involved: State, NSF, EPA
Ozone Depletion. (Nov. 16-25, Copenhagen). The parties to the
Montreal Protocol will meet to agree to accelerated phaseout
schedules for ozone depleting chemicals, the addition of new
12
substances to be controlled (HCFCs and methyl bromide), and to
define the financial mechanism agreed to as part of the London
Amendments to the Montreal Protocol. The U.S. should support the
addition of the new substances to the control list and it appears
that it will do so. Of some concern is the schedule for HCFC and
methyl bromide limitations which have yet to be worked out. The
U.S. is in a strong position to push for an aggressive phase-out
schedule for methyl bromide since, under the Clean Air Act, the U.S.
will have to phase out production of the substance by the year 2000.
It appears likely, however, that support for methyl bromide
reductions will coalesce around proposals to reduce production in
the year 2000 by 25 percent from 1991 levels.
With regard to the financial mechanism, some EC countries have
proposed moving the mechanism into the Global Environment Facility
of the World Bank/UNEP/UNDP. Developing countries strongly oppose
this proposal. The U.S. should support continuation of an
independent financial mechanism with the qualification that we will
evaluate its effectiveness in one or two years. There is nothing to
be gained by moving the mechanism to the GEF and such a move would
alienate the developing countries.
Finally, the parties are considering adoption of an "essential
use exemption" on the phaseout schedules. This loophole needs to be
drawn much more tightly than in the current draft text. It is not
clear at this point what definition of essential use the
Administration will advocate.
Agencies involved: State, EPA.
Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes.
(Nov. 30 - Dec. 4, Montevideo). Although the Senate has granted its
advice and consent to ratification, the United States has yet to
become a party to the Convention because the Congress did not pass
the necessary implementing legislation. As a result, the U.S. will
participate as an observer rather than a party. Several major
issues will be addressed at the meeting. First, the parties will
initiate discussions on, and perhaps agree to, technical guidelines
for meeting the Convention's requirement that hazardous waste be
managed in an "environmentally sound manner." If these guidelines
are weak, the Convention will be relatively ineffective. As the
Foreign Relations Committee urged in its report on the Convention,
the United States should support adoption of guidelines that provide
equivalent environmental protection to standards established in U.S.
law. Second, the parties will adopt rules of procedure. A key
point in these discussions for the United States will be agreement
that budgets only be adopted by consensus. Third, the Parties will
discuss whether a protocol setting forth rules and procedures for
liability and compensation for damage resulting from the
transboundary movement of hazardous waste should be negotiated.
13
Agencies involved: State, EPA
December
Global Environment Facility. (Dec. 1-4, Abidjan). The meeting will,
in theory, finalize the governing structure for the GEF. In an
optimistic scenario, the GEF could become a principal source of
funding for environmental activities in the areas of biodiversity
protection, climate change, and oceans as well as a lever to improve
the environmental "quality" of World Bank loans. In a pessimistic
scenario, the GEF would do little more than become a green cover for
continuation of business as usual at the Bank.
The U.S. should push for a transparent governance structure
which nonetheless maintains some mechanism for U.S. review of or at
least input into project approval. The U.S. should push for maximum
public access to project documentation. The Administration has been
fairly good on this.
Agencies involved: Treasury, State
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee. (Dec. 7-10, Geneva). This
meeting is intended to get the ball rolling on implementation of the
Climate Convention even though it has not yet entered into force.
One of the principal items on the agenda will be discussion of the
items tasked to the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties
(see attachment). The meeting's provisional agenda also notes that
the participants could review the adequacy of the commitments
undertaken in the Convention and recommend adoption of amendments.
This opens the door for a discussion of adopting targets and
timetables for stabilizing CO2 emissions. This will be the first
formal opportunity to advocate such measures within the Convention
framework since its signing.
At the December meeting, the United States will also present a
draft national plan to meet its obligations under the Convention.
This plan will be presented pursuant to a promise by President Bush
to have such a plan prepared by January 2.
Agencies involved: State, EPA, DOE
Follow-up Biodiversity Treaty Meetings, (Nairobi).
Other
International Conference on Population and Development. (Sept. 5-13,
1994, Cairo). Preparations for this Conference have already begun.
14
The first preparatory meeting (PrepCom) was held in spring, 1991.
It has been followed by a series of experts and regional meetings.
The second PrepCom will take place in August of 1993 and the third
in 1994. Clearly, a new Administration will want its positions in
line heading into the second PrepCom. Moreover, the United States
will have to submit its country statement by December 31, 1992 for
presentation to the European Regional Population Conference to be
held March 23-26 in Geneva. Agencies involved: State
World Conference on Women (1995, Beijing) This U.N.-sponsored
conference follows by ten years the Nairobi Conference on women.
The conference will assess implementation of forward-looking
strategies adopted in Nairobi on peace, development, and equality.
The Congress has required a draft of U.S. report and recommendations
to be submitted in the summer of 1993.
***
15
TEL:
Oct 30.92 11:28 No. 005 P.02
fle. - 100 days
28 October 1992
Molly H. Olson
UN Sustainable Development Commission
(w)(202)466-8154
Fax(202)466-8154
Action
(h)(202)338-6488
1) The President-elcct could announce strong support for an
enabling resolution to formally establish the high level Commission on
Sustainable Development at the United Nations, which has as its mandate
the effective implementation of Agenda 21.
2) Appoint the Vice President (or his representative) to be the
U.S. "Environmental Ambassador" to the UN Sustainable Development
Commission.
3) The President should make it known that the U.S. will take an
active interest in the senior appointments to such a Commission, and
will take a strong interest in seeing adequate funding levels support
such a Commission.
Explanation
The Secretary-General's second round of UN reforms in the next 2-4
months is critical to the effective implementation of UNCED within the
UN system. The UN Commission on Sustainable Development will
provide the primary ongoing mechanism to achieve the objectives of
the Earth Summit; and in particular Agenda 21,
By appointing the Vice President (or his representative) to such a
Commission, the U.S. would be clearly demonstrating to the Nation and
the rest of the world the seriousness and priority of a "New World Order"
in the Clinton Administration. It would 'up the antc' and encourage
other major nations to rally. It would also give Gore the platform to
provide major world leadership on Issues he is passionate about.
In order for the Commission to be effective, it will need to bc an
independent unit reporting directly to the Secretary-General. The
Chief Executive Officer's rank should be at least at the Director-
General's level. This will ensure that the rest of the UN structure takes
this commission and its role scriously. If the Secretary-General's
reforms include a new Deputy Secretary-General position encompassing
environment/development responsibilities, this individual could also
head the Commission's Secretariat.
No congressional action is required for the proposed actions, however,
the congress or an appointed task force or domestic commission will
want to address the important questions of U.S. implementation of
domestic Ecologically Sustainable Development initiatives. This domestic
initiative could include restructuring present agencies to include: a
Commission For the Future, to look at supporting innovative
technology, clean production and green business/economic initiatives;
a Resource Assessment Commission, to look at the ecological
sustainability of natural resource industries such as old growth logging,
to address early, resource use, environmental regeneration and job
retraining to avoid jobs VS environment confrontations in future.
TEL:
Oct 30,92 11:28 No.005 P.03
28 October 1992
Molly Olson
(w)(202)466-8154
Fax(202)466-8173
(h)(202)338-6488
G77 Summit Meeting on Ecologically
Sustainable
Development
Action
The President-clect could announce, (as part of a package of
international conservation initiatives) that the U.S. will host a G77
(developing country) leaders summit meeting.
Explanation
As a clear sign of a new U.S. willingness to dialogue on a partnership in
ecologically sustainable development, the U.S. could call together all the
leaders of the developing countries (G77) to discuss:
Public and private development financing;
Technology cooperation and transfer:
Debt reduction including debt for nature swaps;
(Campaign promise 22 April 1992); and
Trade reforms.
The objective would bc to link U.S. private sector capabilities to
developing country needs.
It is important to note that such a meeting would need to occur in the
context of a package of initiatives, and that a major sore point for
developing countries has been the U.S.' unwillingness to put up new
and additional funding for important G77 issues related to ecologically
sustainable development. In fact, it would be fair to say that the U.S. has
not accepted its responsibility on a range of international conservation
programs including untied funding for the Global Environment
Facility (GEF), the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP),
Technology Transfer, and the Climate change and Biodiversity
Conventions.
If conducted in the context of other international conservation
initiatives it could be a very promising way to heal some of the wounds
and ensure great strides are made toward achieving ecologically
sustainable development.
TEL:
Oct 30.92 11:28 No. 005 P.04
28 October 1992
Molly H. Olson
Biological Diversity Convention
(w)(202)466-8154
Fax(202)466-8173
Action
(h)(202)338-6488
1) The U.S. should sign the Biodiversity Convention.
2) The United States could host a meeting of the parties to the
Biological Diversity Convention, to discuss implementing regulations.
Explanation
The immediate signing of the Biodiversity Convention would be a clear
illustration of America's new willingness to provide global leadership --
leadership that Bush clearly relinquished at the Earth Summit. It could
be announced as part of a package of initiatives for international
environmental leadership. To date, 154 Countries, including all major
nations except the U.S., have signed the Biodiversity Convention. The
U.S. decision not to sign the Convention was a shock to the rest of the
participants at the Rio Earth Summit. Reilly was quoted saying that
"The U.S. early on supported the need for a Biodiversity Convention so it
was a perverse twist that we alone rejected it."
The reasons for Bush's unwillingness to sign:
a) Provisions intended to ensure that developing countries share
financially in the benefits/profits from exploitation of biological
/genetic resources in their countries, potentially infringing on
"intellectual property rights" (IPR). Publicly, Bush sald that it would
cost American jobs. Many news accounts blamed intensive lobbying by
the pharmaceutical industry. Biotech industries in Europe voiced no
opposition to their government's support for the treaty. Even in the
U.S., 70 scientists and other employees of Genetech wrote to the
President stating that his refusal to sign the treaty was likely to do more
harm than good to the industry. It is widely understood that Quayle's
Council on Competitiveness was the source of the obstruction.
b) Funding mechanisms and schedules in developing countries.
These problems could be addressed in any implementing regulations
once the U.S. becomes a party to the Convention.
The U.S. could host a meeting of the Parties to the Biodiversity
Convention once we have signed it, to address implementing
regulations. This would be a positive way to overcome any perceived
difficulties with the convention.
This is an easy, popular, action with no budgetary implications in the
first 100 days. To do anything other than sign the Convention would be
perceived as very weak.
No immediate congressional action required.
TEL:
Oct 30,92 11:28 No.005 P.05
October 29, 1992
Brooks Yeager
(202)466-8154
FAX: 466-8173
(301)593-2131
[Withdraw Interior Department Recommendation to Develop
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge "1002" Area]
Action:
We recommend that the President, in the first weeks of the new
Administration, withdraw (by letter) the Interior Department's April,
1987 recommendation to Congress to authorize an oil and gas leasing
program in the coastal plain ("1002 Area") of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge. Simultaneously, the President should submit to
Congress a recommendation, with accompanying legislation, to
designate the entire Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as wilderness
under the 1964 Wilderness Act.
Background:
The fate of the Arctic NWR coastal plain has been a major point of
controversy between the environmental community and several
major oil companies since the debate over the Alaska National
Interest Lands Act (ANILCA) in 1980. The House version of the
Alaska Lands bill would have protected the coastal plain as
wilderness; the Senate version, which was signed into law by
President Carter after the 1980 election, mandated a study of the
area and further recommendations.
The Reagan Administration's recommendation to drill was presented
to Congress in April, 1987, in the form of the "1002 Report." Highly
controversial itself, the report obscured the reservations of federal
scientists concerning the results of drilling such a fragile and
wildlife-rich area, and recommended opening the entire area to
drilling. Despite this recommendation, and strong support from both
Reagan and Bush, the 100th, 101st, and 102nd Congresses
consistently rejected drilling legislation. In each Congress, the
number of co-sponsors for wilderness legislation, first offered by Mo
Udall and more recently by Senator Baucus and Rep. Mrazek, has
grown. This year, the House and Senate wilderness bills accumulated
133 and 25 cosponsors, respectively.