1976 (TIAS 8278; 27 UST 1685). See the 1974 Digest, pp. 560-564, and the 1975 Digest, pp. 648-650. On January 30, 1976, the Governing Board of the International Energy Agency adopted a Long Term Cooperation Program, with effect from March 8, 1976 (TIAS 8229; 27 UST 231). Under the new program, the IEA member countries have agreed: to create a framework to facilitate the execution of joint energy development projects, drawing together technology, capital, and manpower from two or more IEA countries; to consider on a case-by-case basis guaranteeing access to a portion of the offtake to other IEA countries that join in large scale projects which substantially increase energy production over what it otherwise would be; - to undertake not to allow imported oil to be sold in their domestic economies below a common fixed price of $7.00 per barrel. This minimum support price is a standby system designed to protect the commitment to the development of new conventional energy in Alaska, the North Sea, etc., against disruption from dumping or predatory pricing by oil exporting countries; - to cooperate in conservation through the fixing of joint conservation targets and the intensive review of national conservation programs to maintain progress toward these targets, reinforce national efforts, and exchange conservation experience and expertise; - to cooperate in energy research and development including assistance in developing country research and development programs, the elaboration of an overall IEA research and development strategy, intensified information exchanges, and joint projects; and - to make best efforts not to introduce new discrimination against other IEA members as regards access to energy technology, investment opportunities, and production. The long term program pledges IEA governments to use their "best endeavors" to (1) use whatever discretionary authority they may have under existing legislation and regulations to assure that nationals of other IEA countries are not treated less favorably in the energy area than their own nationals; and (2) avoid introducing legislation which would prevent them from granting such national treatment. A background statement submitted by the Department of State to the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House, and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations states with respect to the legal authority for U.S. participation: This long term cooperation program calls for reviews, exchanges of information, and the setting of group targets which are clearly within the authority of the Executive. With respect to the commitment on nondiscrimination and access, it is understood in the IEA that the "best endeavors" formula applies to the Executive but does not bind the Congress. We would not be under any obligation to seek elimination of any existing legislation or regulations. The commitment to maintain a minimum safeguard price is subject to the availability of appropriate authority. That is, the commitment is to maintain the MSP if authority is available, or to seek authority at an appropriate time in light of oil market developments if such authority is not available. Executive Order 11932, issued by the President on Aug. 4, 1976, provides guidance on the classification of certain information and material obtained from advisory bodies created by the IEA to implement the International Energy Program. Such information and material which requires protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interest of the national defense or foreign relations of the United States is to be classified pursuant to E.O. 11652 of Mar. 8, 1972, as amended, with the Secretary of State being responsible for the classification, declassification, and safeguarding of such material in the possession of the U.S. Government. See Fed. Reg., Vol. 41, No. 152, Aug. 5, 1976, p. 32691. Organization for Economic Cooperation and At the ministerial meeting of the Council of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) at Paris on June 21, 1976, Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger called for increased cooperation among the industrial nations in an effort to reduce the immediate energy vulnerability of such countries and achieve a satisfactory global balance of energy supply and demand over the long term. On behalf of the United States, he proposed that OECD members take the following cooperative steps: -First, that we establish on an urgent basis joint energy production projects to pool technical know-how and financing in areas such as coal extraction and utilization, uranium enrichment, and synthetic fuels. Such actions would accord with the commitments we undertook in the IEA [International Energy Agency] Long Term Program. They will contribute to the early availability of commercially attractive additional energy sources. -Second, that we establish collective and individual goals for substantially reduced dependence on imported oil by 1985. This will require agreed targets for additional energy production, particularly in the coal and nuclear energy sectors; these represent our best hope for substantially reducing our energy dependence in the next decade. -Third, that we agree to intensify our national efforts to reduce the growth in demand for energy. The United States urges that the Governing Board of the IEA launch these efforts on a priority basis. . . . For the full text of Secretary Kissinger's address to the OECD Council, see Dept. of State Bulletin, Vol. LXXV, No. 1934, July 19, 1976, p. 77. Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries At a ministerial meeting of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) in mid-December 1976 in Qatar, eleven OPEC members announced their intention to raise their oil prices by 10 percent on January 1, 1977, and a further 5 percent in July 1977. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates refused to go along with the majority and indicated the intention to increase their prices by 5 percent and to hold that level throughout 1977. President Ford issued the following statement on December 17, 1976, responding to the OPEC action: We deeply regret OPEC's decision to raise, once again, the price of oil. We very much appreciate the efforts of those OPEC members, particularly Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, whose sense of international responsibility and concern for the adverse impact of an oil price increase on the world economy led them to advocate restraint and to refuse to go along with the increase proposed by the others. Unfortunately, however, the majority of OPEC members, citing artificial economic justifications and ignoring the destructive consequences of their actions, chose to take a course which can only be termed irresponsible. The United States has joined with many other nations in an international effort to improve the quality and degree of global cooperation. The prosperous world which we and other nations seek, in the interest of developed and developing nations alike, depends on a sense of shared responsibility. This requires that nations avoid actions which harm one another. It requires that every country understand that, in an interdependent world, shortsighted actions, however seemingly attractive in the near term, can have long-term consequences detrimental to its prosperity and to that of all other countries. It requires a common commitment to the well-being of all peoples and special sensitivity to the plight of the world's poorest societies. The decision of the OPEC majority clearly does not meet such standards of international responsibility. For our part this latest price increase can only serve as a sharp reminder for all Americans of the need to take urgent action to strengthen our conservation efforts and develop new sources of energy in order to reduce our dependence. And it must serve as a reminder to all oil-consuming nations of the need to work closely together to reduce our reliance on imported oil and our vulnerability to arbitrary OPEC decisions. Dept. of State Bulletin, Vol. LXXVI, No. 1961, Jan. 24, 1977, p. 67. Interagency Cooperation The Agency for International Development (AID) announced on November 15, 1976, that it had signed that day a memorandum of understanding with the Energy Research and Development Ad ministration (ERDA) to coordinate energy programs designed to benefit developing countries. Under its terms the two agencies agreed to cooperate in the formulation and execution of plans, programs, and projects of mutual interest. Activities undertaken are to reflect AID's primary concern for improving the quality of life of the poor majority in developing countries and ERDA's interest in the provision of energy technology appropriate to the current and future needs of the United States and of the international community. Press Release AID-76-111, Nov. 15, 1976. AID has a mandate from Congress (22 U.S.C. 2151d) to help developing countries alleviate their energy problems through research and development of suitable energy sources and conservation methods, pilot projects, and information collection and analysis. ERDA has a mandate from Congress (42 U.S.C. 5813) to encourage and participate in international cooperation involving energy and related environmental research and development. Bilateral Agreements The Department of State released on May 10, 1976, the ad referendum text of a treaty between the United States and Canada concerning transit pipelines, which was initialed by representatives of the two Governments on January 28, 1976. The treaty would confirm to both countries a regime of noninterference and nondiscrimination for existing and future transit pipelines carrying oil, natural gas, and other hydrocarbons destined for one country across the territory of the other. An arbitral procedure is provided for settlement of any dispute regarding the interpretation, application, or operation of the treaty which is not settled by negotiation between the parties. The purpose of the May 10 release was to provide for full consultations with all interested parties before final decision. The Department's release specified that neither Government had signed, nor had the U.S. Government given its final approval to the proposed treaty, and that release of the text did not prejudge final approval of the draft agreement nor a decision by the Administration on a transportation system for Alaskan natural gas. The Department also initiated consultations on May 10 with the Congress and interested persons on the basis of the draft text and published a notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment on or before June 9. Dept. of State Bulletin, Vol. LXXIV, No. 1928, June 7, 1976. The treaty, with only one substantive change from the ad referendum text, was signed at Washington on Jan. 28, 1977. For the text of the signed treaty, see Dept. of State Press Release No. 29, Jan. 28, 1977. Sec. 301 of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-153;87 Stat. 588) authorized and requested the President to enter into negotiations with Canada for a pipeline or other transportation system for oil and natural gas. Civil Uses Atomic Energy The United States and Canada entered into an interim agreement on the importation by the United States of uranium from Canada, effected by an exchange of notes on March 18 and 25, 1976 (TIAS 8287; 27 UST 1891; entered into force March 25, 1976). The agreement establishes mutually acceptable procedures under which Canadian origin natural uranium may be imported into the United States for enrichment and subsequent use by U.S. utilities. The United States provides peaceful uses assurances for such natural uranium and derived special nuclear material. The interim arrangement will remain in force until the United States and Canada have established a mutually acceptable procedure by an agreement which takes into account the safeguards regime established pursuant to an agreement between the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the application of safeguards in the United States, or for two years, whichever is earlier, provided that any uranium delivered under the interim procedure will remain under that procedure until the mutually acceptable permanent procedure is established. The interim agreement enabled certain U.S. utilities which had purchased natural uranium from Canada to import it into the United States without awaiting negotiation of a more complex permanent agreement, thus averting renegotiation of the contracts at substantially higher prices. Nuclear Exports In testimony on February 24, 1976, before the Subcommittee on Arms Control, International Organizations, and Security Agreements of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, George S. Vest, Director of the Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs, Department of State, outlined minimum standards which the United States had decided to apply to its future nuclear exports. Mr. Vest stated that most of the standards were consistent with current U.S. practice and that the United States was prepared to adopt more stringent constraints when appropriate. He described the U.S. decision to apply the standards as resulting from its ongoing consultations with other nuclear-exporting countries aimed at devising a common set of standards concerning safeguards and other related controls associated with peaceful nuclear exports. He continued: [I]t is important to recognize that what is involved here is not a single self-contained activity seeking a permanent solution to the problem of nuclear proliferation, but part of an evolutionary process. The nature of the problem, the technology which creates it, |