- The P. 30 Currently, an interagency working group is reviewing two climate change proposals for quantitative emissions limitations and reductions objectives from Germany and from the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS). experiences accumulated from the analytical process will enhance the capability of the working group in performing further analysis of similar issues. 18E. WHEN WILL IT BE COMPLETED AND AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW? Answer: The analysis and interim reports to support the AGBM will match the needs of that process. As your question notes, the process is to be iterative. Some initial work on emissions trends was presented at the second meeting of the AGBM. The initial results of the analytic work on the two protocol proposals as well as additional analyses are anticipated in June 1996. 19. THE AGBM REPORT SAID THAT THE ANALYSIS AND ASSESSMENT WOULD DRAW ON A JOINT PROJECT OF THE ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD) AND INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY (IEA) RELATING TO POLICIES AND MEASURES FOR "COMMON ACTION". IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE OECD AND IEA DO NOT OPERATE IN AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT FASHION, AND THAT MANY OF THEIR PRODUCTS ARE CLASSIFIED EITHER BY THEM OR THE US. THE COMMON MEASURES THE OECD/IEA APPARENTLY ARE EXAMINING INCLUDE A STRONG CARBON TAX, LANDING TAX FOR AIR TRAFFIC ON THE BASIS OF EMISSION LEVELS, INCREASING AND HARMONIZING AVIATION FUEL TAXES, RAISE SALES TAX ON GAS GUZZLERS, CONGESTION TAXES, INCREASE ROAD FREIGHT TAXES, CAFE STANDARDS, APPLIANCE EFFICIENCY STANDARDS, MINIMUM EMISSION STANDARDS, MARKET AGGREGATION FOR NEW TECHNOLOGIES, PHASING OUT HFCS, TRADEABLE PERMITS, AND MORE. 19A. PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY THE US BELIEVES THAT THE AGBM SHOULD UTILIZE THE OECD/IEA AND SIMILAR ORGANIZATIONS WHEN THEY DO NOT UTILIZE AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT PROCESS THAT ALLOWS PARTICIPATION BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR, AS WELL AS GOVERNMENTS. Answer: The Administration believes that it is appropriate to use international sources of expertise that have generated useful data, and that have significant levels of resources to bring to bear on issues such as climate change. The OECD and IEA exemplify the value added that such organizations can bring and have access to a statistical data-base, as well as to technical expertise that is unparalleled among other international - Rohrabacher: October 19, 1996 Response p. 31 OECD and IEA have successfully advocated an open process in which non-government (including environmental, business and academic) experts are to be provided with early drafts of the analyses; comments from these experts are anticipated to be fed into subsequent iterations. 19B. PLEASE PROVIDE THE DETAILS ABOUT THE OECD/IEA COMMON MEASURES PROJECT AND ITS STATUS. - Answer: The OECD/IEA common measures project is a continuation of a long series of programs which the IEA and OECD have been jointly pursuing, on behalf of member countries, in support of the FCCC process. The first program undertook to develop (in conjunction with the IPCC) a methodology for inventorying greenhouse gases; it was completed in 1992, and is currently being revised. The second project developed guidelines for reporting by Annex I Parties. The guidelines were completed and adopted by INC 10 in 1994; these became the basis for the preparation of Annex I Party first communications under the FCCC. The third project was the development of recommendations for the review of national communications; these guidelines were adopted at INC 11 and are the basis for the current review of national communications now underway. The current project is designed to consider what policies and measures might be undertaken in common. In particular, the effort is to provide analyses of the benefits and costs of undertaking individual measures (including the possible "leakage" if only some countries act), the trade implications, the economic and environmental costs and benefits, and the greenhouse reductions that might accrue. Recommendations or decisions on the adoption of any specific measure are not proposed as part of the project. A list of the measures that will be considered for analysis and for case study development is attached; a copy of the first draft reports from the first four analyses are also attached (and already have been circulated to U.S. non-government experts for their review). 19C. WHY IS THE US SUPPORTING IT? Answer: The U.S. believes that such analytic work will prove valuable to the process of negotiating next steps under the FCCC. Few countries have the capacity to evaluate all options -- or to consider the impacts that certain courses of action might have on non-actors. The IEA and OECD are well-constituted to undertake such a program of work. It can be expected that the results could further a more efficient and cost-effective implementation of the FCCC Rohrabacher: October 19, 1996 Response P. 32 19D. ARE DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE US BY THESE ORGANIZATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT CLASSIFIED BY THE OECD, THE IEA, OR THE US? Answer: Documents developed by the group are classified by the Annex I Experts group following OECD Rules of Procedure, although documents may be de-restricted at the Group's discretion. The USG was instrumental in changing the Group policy; early drafts will now be made available for comment by both government and non-government experts. 19E. WHAT IS THE STATUTORY OR OTHER BASIS FOR SUCH CLASSIFICATION? Answer: Under the OECD's Rules of Procedure, deliberations of subsidiary bodies (e.g., OECD Committees) are private and on a confidential basis. (Rules of Procedure are adopted by OECD Council Decision and therefore binding.) In order for confidentiality to be lifted, it has to be done by a specific Council decision. The OECD Council does decide periodically to de-restrict documents. 19F. WHAT IS THE EXPECTED DEADLINE FOR RESULTS TO BE PROVIDED TO AGBM? Answer: It is anticipated that the first results of the project case studies will be completed before COP2 in July 1996. 19G. WILL THERE BE PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT OF DRAFT RESULTS BEFORE THEY ARE SUBMITTED TO THE AGBM? Answer: The public -- through governments in each country participating in the effort -- will be provided with an opportunity to review and comment on the materials before they are submitted in final form to the AGBM. Initial drafts of documents that have been completed to date have already been made public by the United States. 19H. DOES THE US FAVOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMON MEASURES? Answer: We have long supported the notion of a "common menu of measures" from which countries might choose their own actions; we remain interested in the results of the OECD/IEA project and studies to learn whether a different approach Rohrabacher: October 19, 1996 Response D. 33 20. I UNDERSTAND FROM THE SEPTEMBER 22, 1995 EDITION OF SCIENCE THAT THE WHITE HOUSE, THE INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE, AND THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES HELD A CONFERENCE IN SEPTEMBER ABOUT THE LINKAGE BETWEEN CLIMATE CHANGE AND HEALTH EFFECTS. 20A. PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS LINKAGE, AND PROVIDE THE PEER-REVIEWED STUDIES SUPPORTING THIS LINKAGE. Answer: Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) critically assessed the scientific literature which studied the linkages between climate change and human health. The list of references of chapter 18 of IPCC is attached. The key conclusions of IPCC WG II are: Climate change is likely to have wide-ranging and mostly adverse impacts on humans health, with significant loss of life. These impacts would arise by both direct and indirect pathways, and it is likely that the indirect impacts would, in the longer term, predominate. Direct health effects include increases in (predominantly Indirect effects of climate change include increases in the potential transmission of vector-borne infectious diseases (e.g., malaria, dengue, yellow fever, and some viral encephalitis) resulting from extensions of the geographical range and season for vector organisms. Projections by models (that entail necessary simplifying assumptions) indicate that the geographical zone of potential malaria transmission in response to world temperature increases at the upper part of the IPCC-projected range (3-5° C by 2100) would increase from approximately 45% of the world population to approximately 60% by the latter half of the next century. This could lead to potential increases in additional annual cases, relative to an assumed global Rohrabacher: October 19, 1996 Response P. 34 non-vector-borne infectious diseases--such as salmonellosis, cholera, and giardiasis-- also could occur as a result of elevated temperatures and increased flooding. Additional indirect effects include respiratory and Quantifying the projected impacts is difficult because 20B. PLEASE IDENTIFY ALL THE CONFERENCE SPONSORS AND THE FEDERAL FUNDS THAT WERE EXPANDED. Answer: The Conference was co-sponsored by the Institute of 20C. I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CONFERENCE, IN A BREAKOUT DISCUSSION GROUP ON PUBLIC OUTREACH RISK COMMUNICATION, DEVELOPED RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH WERE PRESENTED BY AN EPA OFFICIAL. ONE DESCRIPTION OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTS THAT THEY INVOLVE CONSIDERABLE USE OF PUBLIC RELATIONS TECHNIQUES, SUCH AS PREPARING PRESS KITS, AUTHORING ARTICLES, USING THE INTERNET, AND DISTRIBUTING LITERATURE FOR DOCTORS TO GIVE PATIENTS. PLEASE PROVIDE A COPY OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, EXPLAIN THEIR STATUS, AND INDICATE WHAT ROLE THE GOVERNMENT |