A5.2.1 The Mid-Atlantic Regional Assessment (MARA) is one of the regional assessment activities that have been funded by the U.S. Global Change Research Program. These activities are separate from the National Assessment Synthesis Report. The "Overview" document for the MARA has been published. The results from this peer-reviewed document were considered during the preparation of the National Assessment Synthesis Report.

Q5.2.2 Did this regional assessment "meet the requirements for source materials and peerreview" described in Dr. Lane's reply of December 3, 1999 to question 1.4 (Q1.4)?

A5.2.2 Yes, this regional assessment met "the requirements for source materials and peerreview" described in Dr. Lane's December 3, 1999 letter. The Mid-Atlantic Overview document went through a rigorous peer-review process. For full documentation of the comments received and their responses, please refer to the Mid-Atlantic Regional Assessment website: http://www.essc.psu.edu/mara/.

Q5.2.3 Was the supporting research for this report subjected to peer review?

A5.2.3 Yes. Most of the research referenced in the Mid-Atlantic Overview document was published in peer-review scientific journals. In addition, the Mid-Atlantic Overview was itself subjected to a rigorous peer-review prior to publication.

Q5.2.4 If not otherwise publicly available, was this report posted electronically for public comment prior to use in the assessment?

A5.2.4 The Mid-Atlantic Overview report went through a public comment period before it was completed. The Overview has now been published and is available to the public. It is published on the World Wide Web at http://www.essc.psu.edu/mara/ and comments are welcomed. The full report of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Assessment, a lengthier background and foundation document, is currently undergoing peer review and is expected to be published in the Fall of 2000.

Q5.2.5 Was the draft assessment published in the Federal Register for a 60 day public comment period?

A5.2.5 No.

Q5.2.6 Please explain why the publishing and issuing this assessment was not in violation of the conference report language quoted above and in direct contradiction to your March 9 statement that “we will in fact follow all of that language."

A5.2.6 The regional reports are not Federal reports, and the USGCRP therefore believes that Congressional report language is not applicable to them. This is why the regional reports

Q5.3 The April 2000 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives contains the article "The Potential Health Impacts of Climate Variability and Change for the United States: Executive Summary of the Report of the Health Sector of the U.S. National Assessment," by Jonathan A. Patz, et al.

Q5.3.1 Was this sectoral assessment part of the "input" for the National Assessment Synthesis Report under section 106 of the Global Change Research Act of 1990. If not, what was the authority for the regional assessment?

A5.3.1 The Environmental Health Perspectives article is the executive summary of one of the sectoral assessment activities that have been funded by the U.S. Global Change Research Program. These activities are separate from the National Assessment Synthesis Report. The results from this peer-reviewed document were considered during the preparation of the National Assessment Synthesis Report.

Q5.3.2 Did this regional assessment “meet the requirements for source materials and peerreview" described in Dr. Lane's reply of December 3, 1999 to question 1.4 (Q1.4)?

A5.3.2 Yes, this sectoral assessment met "the requirements for source materials and peer-review" described in Dr. Lane's December 3, 1999 letter.

Q5.3.3 Was the supporting research for this report subjected to peer review?

A5.3.3 Yes. Most of the research referenced in the "Health Sector Executive Summary" was published in peer-review scientific journals. In addition, the Health Sector Executive Summary was itself subjected to a rigorous peer-review prior to publication.

Q5.3.4 If not otherwise publicly available, was this report posted electronically for public comment prior to use in the assessment?

A5.3.4 The executive summary has been published and is thus available to the public. In addition, the full draft report of the health sector is currently available for a 60-day public comment period at the National Assessment website: http://www.nacc.usgcrp.gov/healthreport.html.

Q5.3.5 Was the draft assessment published in the Federal Register for a 60 day public comment period?

A5.3.5 No.

Q5.3.6 Please explain why the publishing and issuing this assessment was not in violation of the conference report language quoted above and in direct contradiction to your

A5.3.6 The sectoral reports are not Federal reports, and the USGCRP therefore believes that Congressional report language is not applicable to them. This is why the sectoral reports have not been posted in the Federal Register.

Q5.4 What other regional and sectoral analyses have been published or issued to date, and to what extent has the process for publishing or issuing each such analysis complied with the provisions of the House Report 106-379 quoted above and in accordance with your March 9 statement that “we will in fact follow all of that language"?

A5.4 At this point, only the Pacific Northwest, Alaska, and the Mid-Atlantic "Overview" regional assessment reports have been prepared, reviewed, published, and distributed. Before being published, each of these reports went through an extensive peerreview process coordinated by the authors of each report, as called for in the guidance that was sent to all regional and sectoral teams from the USGCRP. However, the review process and content of the reports are under the control of the authors, not the USGCRP. As stated above, the regional and sectoral reports are not Federal reports, and the USGCRP therefore believes that Congressional report language is not applicable to them.

Q5.5 What is the schedule for publishing or issuing all the remaining other regional and sectoral analyses and the National Assessment Synthesis Report, and what are the reasons for the significant delays?

A5.5 Enclosed is a copy of the current schedule for the publication of the regional and sectoral reports (Attachment 1). As you have noted, the current publication dates are significantly behind the initially planned dates. In general, this is because the complex analyses that are being undertaken have taken longer than originally projected. In the case of the National Assessment Synthesis Report, the 60-day public comment period called for in House Report 106-379 is also contributing to the delay.

Q5.6 Do you intend that the process for publishing or issuing each such remaining analysis, as well as the Synthesis Report, will comply with the provisions of the House Report 106-379 quoted above and in accordance with your March 9

A5.6 The provisions of the House Report 106-379 are being followed in the publishing of the National Assessment Synthesis Report. The Congressional language, however, does not apply to the regional and sectoral reports because these are not Federal reports. However, all of the regional and sectoral reports are undergoing extensive peer-review and review by stakeholders. All are getting public input in various ways.

Q5.7 As noted above, in his December 3, 1999 response to Q1.2, Dr. Lane said that these assessments are "intended to produce a set of specific regional and sectoral analysis that are useful for regional and sectoral decision makers and material resource managers." Who are the decision makers and manager that you have in mind, and do you agree that they would expect the assessment to be subjected to rigorous peer review?

A5.7 The assessment is intended to be useful to a wide range of public and private, local, state, and regional decision makers and managers, who are supervising an array of issues, including, but not limited to, agriculture, water, rangelands, forests, and public health. All of these individuals will expect the report to be held to the rigorous peer review standards that it has been put through.

Q5.8 Under the heading "References” (p. 73) of Chapter 15, “North America” of the IPCC Working Group II April 17, 2000 Draft Report of the Third Assessment, mention is made of the U.S. National Assessment, 2000 “Changing climate and changing acquisitions, Draft Report of the Agricultural Sector Assessment Team." In his December 3, 1999 reply to Q7.1, Dr. Lane said "it would not be appropriate to cite findings or conclusions of the National Assessment Synthesis Report in a published document prior to completion and submission of the report." In reply to Q7.3, Dr. Lane added:

"Finally, it is not a problem for the IPCC to cite regional or sectoral
reports that have been sponsored by the USGCRP and which are
likely to contribute to the National Assessment Synthesis Report."

Please explain the following:

Q5.8.1 The status of this “Draft” report and any others cited in the IPCC Working Group II or III Reports now out for review.

A5.8.1 The agriculture sector assessment report is still a draft report. The draft sectoral reports cited in the draft IPCC reports have been through at least one round of technical review. In addition, the agriculture sector assessment report is based on many peer-reviewed materials, and so mention of the report is a means of referring to these underpinning texts collectively.

Q5.8.2 Whether the reports have gone through the rigorous review mentioned above by Dr.