COPY GIVEN TO SCOTT THAYER • 6 1 10 30 a m by ·S S THE SECRETARY OF' STATE -S7 J m-1 P2 09 WASHINGTON 8715382 une 1 1987 s D· p CONFIDENTIAL RELEASED IN FULL E S S Dear Ed S S-S l wanted you to know of • y atrong personal interest in the TMA arly and aucceaa ful completion of an effect_ive international 'l'MB reaty to protect the stratospheric ozone layer through reducing EB uae of certain chlorofluorocarbons C Ca ancS balona Thia 1• a L aubject which has attracted intense Congreaaional and • edia OES interest and· vhich the highest priority RF rw environmental i11ue •onanytheregard•• global agenda c International agreement la now vlthln reach largely on u s teru The U S position was developed through intenai•e • interagency deliberations leading up to and following the authority to negotiate Circular 175 vbicb was approved on • y behalf by Under Secretary Allen Wallia last November Implementing that authority the u s delegation b11a uucceec5ec5 throµgh th ee difficult negotiating rounds in turning aaide control proposals vhich vould bave been di • advantageoua to the United States and in-gaining vide acceptance of the u s position I am now concerned bovever that within the Domestic Policy - Council process a fev agencies are advocating position• which vould in effect reopen the entire international negotiation vhich l• achedulea for COllpletion in September at a conference of Plenlpot antiar l•• in Nontreal · J understand ana sympathise vitb concern• over both scientific uncertainties and the possible economic lapact of _ - _ _ _ controls Bovever Lee Thomas wbo ia charged vlt b environmental j t protection by the President•• well aa by leglalatlv• aandate bas concluded after over tvo years of analyala that the U S • - ·_position i • a prudent approach to riak aanagement I agree vith 'bim Although acientific certitoae is probably unattainable Jam tmpreaaea by the roving international conaenaua on the threat to the ozone layer largely due to research by our ovn MASA ana • OAA Thi • con • en• u• ia aanlfest in tbe cbange4 po• ltion1 of both The Honorable Edvln Meese Ill Attorney General REVIEW AUTHORITY Adolph Eisner Senior Reviewer CONFIDEN'l'lAL l ECL1 OADR UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case00NF-tmffDJ ltl i59 Doc No C05327475 Date 03 03 2015 CO 5 3 2 7 4 7 5 IFIED ' • U S Department of State Cas f ffeif9E 89 Doc No C05327475 Date 03 03 2015 CONFIDENTIAL - 2 - u s industry vhlch nov officially a4vocatea at leaat a 9lobal freeze on production of CFCs and the European Community which baa proposed a freeze followed by• 20 percent autoutlc reduction and vhich last • onth agreed to conaider • further 30 percent reduction Baaed on contacts with inc uatry lt appear11 that the 20 percent reduction which would not come into effect until 1992-94 could be absorbed by u s industry ut11·tzing existing alternative products and proceaaes While the additional 30 percent cut vould require substitute products the additional tiae frame for-such reduction 8 to 12 yeara from now would be within the •comfort zone• for the aarket ayatem to provide incentives for tbe needed R 6 D ua 1 believe it voulc be inadvisable for to delay the negotiations or to appear nov less concernea over protecting the ozone layer than the European Community anc others who have followed our leaderahip John WhiteheacS· Lee Thoma• anc I American Ambaasadora abroacS and aenior official• on •Y ataff • have all advocated the u s position in contacts with ••nior foreign officials Thia bas contributed to the evolution of policy in many countries A perceived reversal by the u s risks ·an embarrassin_g loss of international credibility •• well •• domestic political acklash Moreover it would riak tbe vorat possible outcome from the standpoint of u s industry and conaumera namely unilateral u s controls added to our 1978 ban on CFCs for aerosol use forced by the Clean Air Act by court order or by nev legislation There are already groving ruaors in Congress and among public interest groups that the Mminiatration la •backsliding• from ita previously • ucb-prai1ed coaaitaent to protect the ozone layer ln order not to jeopardise the progress we bave • ade in this major international negotiation ancS following conaultation with _ Lee Thomas l propoae to inatruct the u s Representative to continue to negotiate in conforaance vitb the existing Circular _ 1·75 authority The objectiv t i a atrong ancS effective international agreement by September containing provi • ion1 as aummarized in the enclosure which is conaiatent with the interagency position developed prior to the aoat recent negotiating round in April J hope you will agree that this la a reasonable position Only a protocol which provides for aignlficant reductions in CFC'• can prudently address the environmental riak • avert needless CONFIDEN'l'IAL UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Casea@NF-IE ffNIDY 59 Doc No C05327475 Date 03 03 2015 - CONFIDENTIAL - 3 - criticiH1 of the Administration and probable unilateral domestic controls and provide th-e needed • tbiulua for incSu • trlal research into alternative products over a reasonable tiae period The Administration will have the opportunity to reviev tbe negotiatecS protocol text before signature by our Government Jf you bave any questions concerning these provisions J vould be pleased to ask Assistant Secretary Negroponte to provide further detail• • I propose to proceed on this baai• unless you feel that thi1 course of action i• not feasible because of compelling objections from some members of the Domestic Policy Council In that· case I propose that we together with Lee Thomas take tbla aatter to the Pre•ident without further delay Sincerely youra George P Shults • Enclos·ure Protocol Summary - - - ' '7 - •• f • D aftecSi OES E1SB tcber UBen 41ck at W0847y 5 29 87 Clearanc••1 »1 S1 L1 N r 'l'iabie Mr Bailey Na Verville BB1 llr cuncUff SPA1Mr • 'l'hoaaa asc111r •uglier•• cauba CONFIDENTIAL UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case00NF-l OffNm59 Doc No C05327475 Date 03 03 2015 CO 5327 4 67iIFIED U S Department of State Cas rJF-if9l Rnl7 e9 Doc No C05327467 Date 03 03 2015 CONFIDENTIAL jRELEASED IN FULL Protocol Summary 1 A freeze at 1986 levels on pro4uction conaumption of CFCs ll 12 113 114 an4 115 and Balons 1 211 and 1301 to take effect one or two yeara after the protocol enter• into force EI P - 2 Periodically acheduled re uctions of CFCs 11 12 113 114 •nd 115 from 1986 levels beginning with 20 percent two to four years after EIF followed by an additional 30 percent apptoximately eight years after EIF with the possibility of further steps as determined by the parties 3 Regularly scheduled assessments of scientific economic and technological factor a prior to any reductions to enable the • parties to adjust tbe reduction acbedule and add or subtract cbemical·s • 4 An ultiaate·objective subject to the assessments aenti onecJ above to ell•inate substantially all potent ial threats t o the atratoapher ic ozone 1 ayer f rom anthropogenic chemicals 5 Strong tra e monitoring and reporting provisions to make the protocol as effective as possible · 6 An attempt to negotiate aome system of voting which would give due weight to the currently significant producing and consuming countries - REVIEW AUTHORITY Adolph Eisner Senior Reviewer - f• CONFmEN'l'l' AL UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State CaseO aNF-®JffN Y 69 Doc No C05327467 Date 03 03 2015