11 09197 SUN 23 JO FAX 2022266983 SUN 23 30 FAX 2022266983 11A09 97 f E E SUBCOMMITTEE E E SUBCOMMITTEE @002 14 00 2 OEOACI I lll'O'tYN J• c llfo 'i• aeOACI •POVTRM_tr J C llfor ig ll N4A1t '4- o lf'W' 36N3SN8KeNN£A Ja W1«rox«ln CKAJRMAN SHERWOOD L BOEHlERT - Vall SHEAMOOO L BOEHieffT HAt fUS 111 1' G I Hr« V«rk haam W FAWl l HAAMS W FAWEt t lll fNgl M • rvh cJ H8TAHC A M OIULLA laTANCe A MOflCLLA NE 001'C ••- 1101'1' • 1 111 WCi OOr tnn«fl trslk -OHflAIA Ct1 fl ACNAASACHSACiiirornlA C111lornl 11 m SCH1 f N•• MqJC O IN SCHiPE N»w MmJco AATO Tawa1 'AATON TkVil N CALYE-T NCALV6AT C aIHc i C •llo nlo ROSCOE G U ATl ETT Mo J • •d AOSCQE C SAATLETT M«ivl- d veAhOH J EHlEAS M c- 1 9 VEANON J EHLERS MicA 9«n O _YI WHOOk '1a d DAV Wei OON ng»id« MATT SALMON Aliiorie MATT SaIMOR T O _S M 0 11'1 V119 •J• Thomas M Oa AS V1rg M GIL GUTICNECHT MlftttiHOI• C L GUTKNCCHT M ARtioi« Mo AK FOL EY Flttlfa MAAK FOL£Y THOMAS W wJNQ JI ° ' THOMAS W •nir ia a NIL'S 11 WINO CNIP PIC JNG urpp CHAAIES l Ch P' PiCKfAiNG MU« ’«atpp CMRI$ C •kNON CKA $ IAAOv CaNnOR Utan UIIIN Tua• KfiVlN SAa Ov TiMi MERRILL COOK u MCAma COOK Uuh ll'Hft ENGUSH PHIL ENGUSH GEORGE R NE™ERCUTT Jo WoolM•el•• GEORGE R NETHERCLTIT J Wa«K i fl oa TOM A C08U'IN 0111• '0 '• TOM A COaUAN TaOai«A«m« PETE 6E6810NS PETEGE66rON3 T«M« ILani Af MnorlfV RA l PNM H '-l T RalphC OflOON m ma l T n ART ftAAT COROON T«nn«w JANIU A TAAFICAN'T J '- Ol la JAMES A TflAfICAHT Qr h3 TlM tlOEMER l cd1n• TIM AOEMEfl AOl E AT tlUDI AMEA J • AJ•b• • ROMRTA e 14fiCIA lauoi CRAMCR JAMESAaAPClAMkh ga JAM'S 4'ch f• 'Ja U S HOUSE OF REPRESEN REPRESENTATIVES TATIVES '•UL _cHALE COMMIT TEE ON SCIENCE COMMITTEE SUITE SUITE 2320 2320 RAYBURN RAYBURN HOUSE HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON WASHINGTON DC DC 20515-6301 20S1S-6301 Pe •• • • u M utCHAEL f OOTLE P«f»fl»vlv nlg '1 ILA JACICSOH T••n iAdLA JACKSON US T«««a IOU LLITHER eillLl THER Mirtr« OM WAl Tl 1 ti CA•l'S C lfto o • 2021225--5371 202 225-6371 '-'11• WALTER R CAPPS CalHMftia DOiii STAIENOW Mo ••t•• OCeBC STaBEnOW U h aaA IOI ITl EA10CiE Non• BOB ITHERiOGE Nonh NCaAMP$ORT«M4 J'StlN T-· TTY TTY 2021 202 226-4410 226-4410 hnp1 - h0118e Oo 01t lc on e h1tn hn«yA tww heiia e w iil«nc«A«lcom« hlm I'• '•• • • Paul M cHALE P«AA fK ani« EOOIE BERNICE JOHNSON Tu11 EOCHE BERNICE JOHNSON AL CEE L H A STif'CS ll•ofl'a•Ta-ia AI CEE HASTINGS Pior'da L N N U 111 M_ Mlof IQo• LVHN N « V R1 Mierlaan l'OE LQICflEN C llo•••• rO LQPCPCN C4ll Dfit a MtO AEl_ 001'lE ' M'l 'l le • • LA - c• - ° CloOAUNE HOOU V HOOUV Oaw m - MUNE tu EN 0 TAUSCHE 1 c ro i tLLlN 0 TAUSCHER Caiifofplg November 8 1997 The Honorable Madeleine K Albright Secretary of State U S U S Department of State 2201 C Street NW Washington DC 20520 Dear Secretary Albright Albright As you As you know know on October 29 1997 House Speaker Newt Gingrich appointed me to lead the Bipartisan House Observer Observer Delegation to the Third Session of the Conference of the Pa nies Parties to the the United Nations Framework FrameworkConvention on Climate Change COP-3 beginning December Convention In making this announcemen announcement t l1 in Kyoto Japan ln the Speaker said There There are three key issues of concern that must be resolved before America commies commits to signing onto any specific action coming out of Kyoto First is the science sound Second will the the proposed proposed solution work And third is the treaty fair to the United States TI1ere Tliere are a tremendous tremendous number of questions on all three issues that have yet to be resolved I share the Speaker's Speaker s concerns and to better understand some of these substantive and procedural procedural matters matters that that directly relate to these issues I would appreciate your reply to the enclosed quesrions directly questions by November 24 1997 1997 II pro dde a copy of your your response response to to each each Member Member of of the the Bipartisan Bipartisan House House’observer also request that you please provide Observer Delegation Delegation Thank Thank you for your assistance SLncereJy SS SE NBRE JAMES SENSENBRENNER JR NN Enclosure Enclosure 5 Ui09 97 11 09 97 SUN SUN 23 31 23 31 FAX FAX 2022266983 2022266983 E E EE E E SUBCOMMITT SUBCOMMITTEE Enclosure Enclosure Questions Questions Submitted by Science Committee Chairman F James Sensenbren Sensenbrenner ner Jr November November 8 8 1997 1997 Uncertainti es in Uncertainties in Emissions Estimates 1 1 Appendix Administration EIA Appendix C C of of the the October 1997 Energy Information Administration ElA publication Emissions o Greenhou se Gases of Greenhouse Gases in in the the United States 1996 addresses uncertainties in emissions estimates For example example page page 105 of ofthe document states the following In “In general general estimates estimates of carbon dioxide emissions are more reliable than estimates for for other other gases gases Although this report does not explicitly calculate uncertainty ranges ranges itit is is likely likely that the estimate of carbon dioxide emissions is accurate to within IO percent within 10 percent ” «Estimates Th level of precision “Estimates of of methane methane emissions are much more uncertain The is probably on the order of 30 to 50 percent is probably percent ” ''Nitrous “Nitrous oxide oxide emissions estimates are by far fer the most unreliable • 1 1 1 1 What What are are the the implications of such large uncertainties in emissions estimates for legallybinding quantified recfuction objectives QELROs and binding quantified emissions limitation and reduaion specifically specifically for for President Clinton's Clinton’s proposal to return U S emissions to 1990 levels between between 2008 2008 and and 2012 1 2 1 2 How are are such such emissions emissions uncertainties uncertainties to to be be addressed addressed by How by the the proposed proposed Kyoto Kyoto Protocol Protocol Greenhouse Gas Sinks 2 2 3 Greenhouse gas sinks are referenced referenced in subparagrap subparagraphh II 2 a 11 2 a of the Berlin Mandate in in regards regards to to QELROs In addition the October 22 QELROs 22 1997 White House Background “Background Information” Information document concerning concerning President President Clinton's Clinton’s climate change proposal states that ·•Emissions Emissions accounting will include include all greenhouse gas sources· sources d and sinks including reforestation ” reforestation It is my understanding understanding however that the October A d Hoc Group on the Berlin Mandate however that Ad AGBM session in Bonn did not AGBM _ begin this important issue until the very end and that the AGBM will further begin consideratio considerationn of of this address the issue in Kyoto on November 30 and December lI just prior to the start of COP-3 address the issue in 2 1 2 1 Please Please explain explain the importance of sinks to President Clinton's Clinton’s greenhouse gas emission targets for the period 2008-2012 and the period thereafter targets for the 2 2 2 2 Please Please also also explain why consideratio considerationn of sinks was not raised by the U S and other Parties until this late stage until It is my understandin understandingg that the Group of 77 G-77 and China China opposes the accounting for sinks in in for sinks setting setting and and achieving any proposed flat rate or differentiated emissions target 3 1 3 1 3 2 3 2 Is tht basis of this opposition Is my my understandin understandingg correct and if so what is the Please Please explain explain the the importance of sinks to President Clinton·s Clinton's greenhoust greenhouse gas emission targets targets for for the the period period 2008-2012 2008-2012 and the period thereafter 003 0003 11 09 97 11 09 97 SUN 8J SUN 2J Jl 23 31 FAX FAX 20222669 2022266983 E E ITTEE E E SUBCOMM SUBCOMMITTEE Enclosure Enclosure -Question Questionss Submitted Submincd by Science Committee Chairman F James Sensenbre Sensenbrenner Jr nner Jr November November 8 1997 Page Page 22 3 3 3 3 4 4 What What Annex Annex II countries if any · also oppose such accounting for sinks and what is the basis basis for for their their opposition opposition At At the the October October AGBM meeting in Bonn Borui I understand understand that a questionna questionnaire regar ng sinks sinks was ire regarding was distributed distributed to the Parties for early reply this month Please provide aa copy of the U S response response to to that ire that questionna questionnaire Meanin ef ul Participat ion by Meaningful Participation bv Key Kev Developin Develoninpe Nations 5 • I understand that on two occasions at the October AGBM meeting meetbg in Bonn the the U S delegation delegation sought 's text the “fundamental sought to to include include in the AGBM Chainnan Chairman’s provision” proposed last last fundamental provision January January by by the the U S but omitted by the AGBM Chairman on future commione commitments by developing nts countries countries and and that that the the AGBM Chairman reiterated his opposition to the U S proposal both times times The AGBM Chainnan 's revised protocol draft document FCCC AG The AGBM Chairman’s FCCC AGBM 1997 CRP 1 REV 1 of of BM 1997 CRP l RE V l Articles tation aJ1d Articles 5 Emission Emissionss Trading 6 Joint Implemen Implementation apd 110O Opt-ln'1 “Opl-In” contains footnotes calling calling for the deletion of these Articles In addition the G-77 and China in regards to to proposals proposals to advance tation of Article 4 1 of the Conventio to advance implemen implementation Conventionn by all Panies Parties not just developing countries countries continues to resist through brackets contained in document FCCC AG FCCC AGBM CRP 1 BM CRP 1 REV REV l I any any proposals aimed at advancing commitme commitments the Convention for for developing developing nts under the countries coun es The G-77 and China also seek provisions requiring new and additional financial financial contributio ns from Annex I Parties to developing countries contributions 5 l 5 1 In light of these AGBM process results to date what evidence existS exists going into Kyoto that that key “key developing nations nations” will meet President Clinton· Clinton’ss October 22 22 1997 requiremen requirementt that that key meaningfully participate in this effort “key developing developing nations meaningfully effort” 5 2 5 2 What ul participate What key “key developing nations nations” must meaningf “meaningful participate” to meet President Clinton Clinton’s ·s requirement requirement 6 · f 5 3 5 3 What What is President Clinton's Clinton’s definition of meaningf “meaningful participation ul panicipatio n 5 4 5 4 By what date must ''key “key developing nations meaningfu meaningfully effon to to meet meet lly participate in this effort President Clinton's requireme nt Clinton’s requirement On October 22 1997 President said that ' The ‘The United States will not assume binding binding obligations obligations unless key developing nations meaningfu meaningfully effort ” Will that Judgment be made made lly participate in this effort judgment be 1 by the President refusing to agree to the adoption of a protocol in Kyoto 2 1 2 by by the the President President refusing refusing to sign or initial such a document at some future date date in his Presidency Presidency 3 3 by by the the President refusing to submit such a document to the Senate for ratification ratification or or 4 4 will will itit be be deferred for a future President to decide @004 12004 ll b9 97 11 09 97 SUN 83 SUN 2J Jl 23 31 FAX FAX 20222669 2022266983 E E ITTEE E E SUBCOMM SUBCOMMITTEE Enclosure -Questions Submitted by Science Committee Chairman Enclosure—Questions Chainnan F James Sensenbre Sensenbrenner nner Jr November November 8 8 1997 1997 Page Page 33 7 In In the the section section of the October Oaober 22 1997 Whice White House Backgrou “Background Information” nd lnfonnatio n document concerning President concerning President Clinton's Clinton’s climate change proposal titled TIIE “THE PRESIDE PRESIDENT'S THREENT'S 11-lREESTAGE '' it is stated By STAGE PLAN ON CLIMATE CHANGE CHANGE “By insisting that the United States States will will not adopt binding obligation s without developing country not adopt binding obligations participation emphasizingg the the participati on and by emphasizin importanc al trading system and joint implement importancee of an internation international implementation advantage of of lowlowation we take advantage cost cost reduction reduction possibilitie possibilitiess wherever they occur -- either cither here or abroad 77 1 1 If any one or two or all of the factors e developing country participation Actors i i e international participation internation al trading tation cited in the above quote fail trading system system joint implemen implementation feil to materialize in in any any Kyoto Kyoto Protocol or other legal instrument instrument or are curtailed significant significantly countries ly to Anne x Anne lI countries only do you agree that 1hese advantag es would be lost or only do you these “advantages” or at best minimized minimized 7 2 Does nal in the above quote include both Annex lI and developing Does the word 'intema tio ‘hitemalional” countries countries or or only only Annex Annex I countries Kyoto mendment Kyoto Protocol A Protocol Amendment 8 It ing that on October 31 in Bonn AGBM It is is my my understand understanding AGBM Chairman Ambassad Ambassador Raul Estradaor Raul Oyuela Oyuela said that he will prepare both a protocol text and an amendmen amendmentt to the UN United Nations Nations Framewo rk Conventio Framework Conventionn on Climate Change text for Kyoto Article 17 of the the Conventio Convention n regarding protocols is silent on the procedures for the adoption of a protocol and the regarding protocols the first first two two meetings meetings of of the Conferenc Conferencee of the Panies Parties have not been able to adopt Rules of Procedure that that address address this this issue On the other hand Article l5 3 15 3 of the Convention provides that tJhe “ t he Parties Panics shall make every effort shall make efifon to reach agreement on any proposed amendmen amendmentt to the Conventio Conventionn by by consensus but allows conse us ” but allows as “as aa last resort resort” the adoption of an amendmen amendmentt by “by a three-fourt three-fourths hs majority majority vote vote of of the Parties present and voting at the meeting meeting ” 8 1 8 1 If If COP-3 COP-3 at Kyoto fails to· to agree on Rules of Procedure that include procedures for for the the adoption of adoption of aa protocol must a protocol be adopted by consensus · 8 2 8 2 It is also my understand ing that on October 30 AGBM Chainnan understanding Chairman Estrada made made aa ruling ruling that he as Cbainnan unilaterally decide what constitutes a consensu that he Chairman could unilaterally “consensus an issue issue s on an even even if if aa nwnber number of countries disagree on that issue What constitutes •·consensu “consensus” in s UN practice and does the U S believe that the Chair of any such practice and docs the U S UN body has the unilateral right to right to determine determine if consensus exists 8 3 Does Does the the U S U S favor or at least not object to the use of the Conventio Conventionn amendmen amendmentt process to to forge forge an an agreement agreement at Kyoto even if the result might be an agreement that the U S could not not support support and and if if so so what is the rationale 4Joos ®005 11 00 97 ll Oe 97 E E E E SUBCOMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE SUN SUN 23 32 23 32 FAX FAX 2022266983 2022266983 Enclosure-Questio ns Submitted by Science Committee Chairman ChainT1an F James Sensenbrenner Jr Enclosure—Questions November 8 1997 Page 44 Military Operations 9 It is my understanding that on October 31 1997 in Bonn the U S raised for the first lime time the need to examine and discuss in Kyoto the important issue of bow'' Pa11ies can “how” the Parties “can protect world peace while preserving our planet through the addition to the agreement of “some some kind of national security or national emergency provision provision ” Page 117 of the October 1997 l 997 Energy Information Administration publication Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States J1996 996 states that Domestic “Domestic military energy consumption is incorporated into U S energy statistics however energy consumption for overseas operations is a more complex issue ” issue 9 1 Please explain the U S objective with respect to emissions from military operations Is it a to exclude from the Protocol's coverage emissions from all militaty military operations whether domestic or overseas or b to include all such emissions for inventory inventoty purposes and then seek a waiver for all or part of them 9 2 In operations' emissions that might cause the In the case of a waiver for all or pan of military operations’ U S to exceed a specific emissions target would the U S be excused from fi’om meeting that specific emissions target or would the U S be required to offset such military operations’ operations' emissions through additional reductions to domestic emissions Consistency of the U S Position 10 The U S Submission of October 21 1996 and its Non-Paper of December 1996 opposed differentiation among Annex I Parties supported banking and borrowing and opposed inflexible internationally harmonized mandated or coordinated policies and measures I understand that the U S has also opposed the European Union bubble “bubble” approach to meeting emission obligations While President Clinton's Clinton’s October 22 remarks did not specifically mention these past positions it is also my understanding that the U S delegation has continued to advocate them in Bonn Can we assume that the U S will irs position on each of these in Kyoto including in Will not change or modify its any closed door meetings with some or all of the Parties and if not why not u s 14 006 ®006