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
120360865
label
National Action Plan
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
120360865
contentType
document
title
National Action Plan
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
120360865
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7432005-20120769F-Seg2-038-006-2018
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
5e0113c6bbbe8fbc
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:
4299
FolderID:
Folder Title:
National Action Plan
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
61
7
1
3
CC: McGinty
FYI
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506
August 26, 1993
Dear Senator Baucus:
Your letter to President Clinton on July 30, 1993, that discussed the National
Action Plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions raised a number of important issues.
You correctly noted that funding priorities need to be closely aligned with our needs
in these times of tight budgets. However, your suggestion of delaying or suspending
some of the research conducted by the USGCRP and transferring part of the
USGCRP funding to the EPA green programs troubles me. The scientific
underpinning needed to understand global climate change well enough to enable major
policy commitments is still beyond reach. To reduce research funding now as a way
to support mitigation options could be seen as "penny-wise but pound-foolish".
We urgently need to improve our understanding of changes in climate at the
regional (sub-continental) level, and to understand the consequences of those changes
to human health, ecological and socio-economic systems. If the current climate
models are close to being correct, then significant changes in global and regional
climate would occur even with the emissions controls currently being discussed by
OECD countries (a cap on emissions from OECD countries at 1990 levels, not a
global cap). A cap of OECD greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels, without a
significant reduction in the expected rate of growth of emissions in developing
countries and countries with economies in transition, will only slightly decrease the
predicted rate of climate change. Consequently, mitigation measures by the U.S. and
other OECD countries, essential as they are, will at best delay an effective doubling
of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations by a relatively small number of decades.
Even a global stabilization of greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels (probably not
achievable), would still result in an effective doubling of carbon dioxide before the
end of the next century.
Therefore, in addition to reducing U.S. and global emissions of greenhouse
gases, the human race must prepare to adapt to climate change. This will require a
significant improvement in our ability to predict the form and extent of regional
climate changes and to quantify the consequences. There is a clear need to expand
the scope of the USGCRP by placing a greater emphasis on impact, adaptation and
mitigation research, key goals of an expanded USGCRP. Consequently, a decrease in
funding for the USGCRP may be counterproductive.
Honorable Max Baucus
Page 2
There is also a need for an improved dialogue between the scientific managers
of the USGCRP and relevant policymakers within the White House and agencies,
including EPA, DOE, Commerce, DOI and DOS. I have initiated an interagency
process for senior level research managers and policymakers to discuss near- and
long-term scientific, technical and implementation needs. This ongoing process will
provide the Administration with the information needed to prioritize funding requests
based on a consensus view of the needs.
I would be delighted to meet with you to discuss the issue of climate change,
measures to reduce U.S. and global emissions of greenhouse gases, and funding
priorities for research and development activities.
Sincerely,
John E H. Gibbons
Director
The Honorable Max Baucus
Chairman, Committee on Environment
and Public Works
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
MAX BAUCUS, MONTANA. CHAIRMAN
DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN. NEW YORK
JOHN M. CHAFEE RHODE ISLAND
IEORGE 1 MITCHELL. MAINE
ALAN K. SIMPSON WYOMING
MANK R. LAUTENBERG. NEW JERSEY
DAVE CORRENENCER MINNESOTA
MARRY RED. NEVADA
JOHN W. WARNER, VIRGINIA
28 ORAHAM, FLORIDA
ROGERT SMITH, NEW HAMPSHIRE
VH L LIEBERMAN, CONNECTICUT
LAUCH FAIRCLOTH, NORTH CAROLINA
a M. METZENBAUM, CHIO
DIRK KEMPTHCRNE, IDAHO
United States Senate
VOFFORD, PENNSYLVANIA
OXER CALIFORNIA
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
PETER L SCHER, STAFF DIRECTOR
¿VEN 1 SHIMBERG. MINORITY STAFF DIRECTOR AND CHIEF COUNSEL
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-6175
July 30, 1993
The Honorable Bill Clinton
President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear President Clinton:
Thank you for writing to request my thoughts on how to
stabilization of greenhouse gas emissions at their 1990 levels.
achieve, in the National Action Plan now being formulated, I
want to take this opportunity to let you know how strongly I feel
that we need a tough and effective national plan, and that Congress
needs to have a significant opportunity to review the draft plan
once it is completed, and before it is made public.
There are several issues about which I feel particularly
strongly. First, I am concerned that the Administration's
priorities regarding resources may be out of line with its stated
objectives. According to the Office of Management and Budget,
almost $1.5 billion dollars has been requested in 1994 to conduct
research on only the scientific aspects of global climate change.
I understand that this is a well-coordinated effort with no overlap
in the work being performed by the nine agencies involved. I also
appreciate that there are still many questions regarding the
dynamics of climate change to be answered.
However, the answers to these scientific questions will not be
available in the short term, and therefore, will not impact your
goal for greenhouse gas emissions reductions. Consequently, a
greater emphasis should be placed on mitigation efforts -- and that
means more money should be devoted to mitigation research and
programs. In these times of shrinking resources, some of the
scientific research on global climate change should be delayed or
suspended in order to pay for the critical mitigation work that
needs to be done immediately and for which there is little public
funding. Specifically, I urge you to increase resources for state
programs and EPA's Green Programs as a part of the strategy. The
National Action Plan will not succeed until these funding
priorities are straightened out.
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
The Honorable Bill Clinton
July 30, 1993
Page 2
Second, as difficult as the task might be, joint
determining whether the U.S. has met your goal.
implementation projects should be taken into account Joint when
implementation projects represent a significant opportunity for
U.S. businesses to make a difference abroad, and reflect the
increasingly global nature of our economy. While I agree that the
National Action Plan must keep the pressure on U.S. business to
look for ways to achieve the maximum greenhouse gas reductions here
at home, domestic solutions cannot be the only means for achieving
the goal.
Joint implementation offers this country more than just a
means for achieving significant and inexpensive greenhouse gas
reductions, however. It will also create a powerful new tool for
promoting U.S. technology innovation and for facilitating global
demand for these technologies. At the same time, by embracing
joint implementation in the National Action Plan, the U.S. will be
able to provide critical world leadership in dealing with the
global warming problem. In addition, it will encourage private
investment in developing countries and allow those countries to
participate in the achievement of global greenhouse gas reductions.
Finally, I urge you to ensure that the Environmental
Protection Agency plays a strong leadership role in the
implementation of the National Action Plan. While many agencies
will necessarily be involved in making the Action Plan a reality,
one agency, the EPA, should be given the ultimate authority to
execute the Plan. That was Congress' intention in passing the
Global Climate Protection Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-204) which provides
that the President, "through the Environmental Protection Agency,
shall be responsible for developing and proposing to Congress a
coordinated national policy on global climate change."
Lines of authority in the National Action Plan must be clear -
- when they are not, problems arise. Section 1605 of the National
Energy Policy Act of 1992 is a perfect example of how ambiguity in
this area leads to bureaucratic infighting. That provision
establishes a mechanism for taking inventory of the national
aggregate of emissions of greenhouse gasses for both 1987-90 and
each subsequent year. This accounting of the baseline and how much
the U.S. needs to reduce emissions is critical to joint
implementation efforts and to domestic reductions as well. The
Department of Energy is required by the statute to consult with the
Environmental Protection Agency in
The Honorable Bill Clinton
July 30, 1993
Page 3
conducting its research, and it was envisioned that the data would
be supplied by the EPA.
However, it is my understanding that EPA's expertise in
developing greenhouse gas emissions inventories is not being
adequately utilized, and that a duplication of efforts is
occurring. I am concerned by this lack of cooperation, and I fear
that these sorts of inter-agency disputes will hinder efforts to
implement the National Action Plan. I therefore recommend that
this project receive high level review by the White House to ensure
that it is being accomplished in accordance with the letter and the
spirit of the law.
Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on global
climate change policy prior to the completion of the National
Action Plan. I would like to request a briefing by your staff for
myself and my staff just prior to release of the draft plan. I
plan to hold a hearing of the Environment and Public Works
Committee shortly after its release to discuss the National Action
Plan. In the meantime, I would appreciate it if you would keep me
informed on the timing of the release of the draft plan.
With best personal regards, I am
Sincerely,
Max Baurs
Max Baucus
CC: Vice President Albert Gore, Jr.
Honorable Carol M. Browner
Honorable Hazel O'Leary
Honorable Timothy Wirth
Kathleen McGinty
United States Senate
UNITED UNIT S STATES
rec'd 8/5/93
Committee on Environment and Public Works
Washington, D.C. 20510-6175
CUPY:
*
*
MAX BAUCUS, MONTANA, CHAIRMAN
X
DANIEL PATRICK MOYNHAN. NEW YORK
JOHN H. CHAFEE, RHODE ISLAND
*
GEORGE J. MITCHELL. MAINE
ALAN K SIMPSON, WYOMING
WATSON
SENATE
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG. NEW JERSEY
DAVE DURENBERGER. MINNESOTA
SCHAFUL
HARRY RED. NEVADA
JOHN W. WARNER VIRGINIA
BOB GRAHAM. FLORIDA
ROBERT SMITH. NEW HAMPSHIRE
LAUCH FAIRCLOTH, NORTH CAROLINA
MAWELL
JOSEPH 1 LIEBERMAN, CONNECTICUT
HOWARD M. METZENBAUM. OHIO
DIRK KEMPTHORNE, DAHO
HARRIS WOFFORD, PENNSYLVANIA
BARBARA BOXER. CALIFORNIA
PETER L SCHER, STAFF DIRECTOR
STEVEN J. SHIMBERG. MINORITY STAFF DIRECTOR AND CHIEF COUNSEL
Telecopier: (202) 224-2322
Office: (202) 224-5031
TO: Kathleen McGuity FAX:
456-2710
OFFICE:
PHONE:
FROM: Senator Baucus
DATE:
July 30
NUMBER OF PAGES 3 + THIS COVER SHEET
MESSAGE/COMMENTS:
FUT Katus
1
Marc
ACTION ITEMS: