[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 244 (Tuesday, December 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79442-79449]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-32238]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

Council on Environmental Quality


Guidelines for Implementation of Executive Order 13141: 
Environmental Review of Trade Agreements

AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative and Council on 
Environmental Quality.

ACTION: Guidelines for implementation of Executive order 13141-
environmental review of trade agreements: final.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On November 16, 1999, President Clinton signed Executive Order 
13141. 64 FR 63169 (Nov. 18, 1999). The Order makes explicit the United 
States' commitment to a policy of careful assessment and consideration 
of the environmental impacts of trade agreements, including, in certain 
instances, written environmental reviews. The Order directs the Office 
of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) and the Council on 
Environmental Quality (CEQ) to oversee implementation of the Order, 
including the development of procedures pursuant to the Order.
    The procedures called for by the Executive Order (the Guidelines) 
are published below. USTR and CEQ developed the Guidelines through an 
extensive public process and consultations with appropriate foreign 
policy, environmental, and economic agencies and Congress. USTR and CEQ 
have carefully taken public views into account in finalizing the 
Guidelines, and the final Guidelines endeavor to reflect many of them.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of the U.S. Trade 
Representative, Environment and Natural Resources Section, telephone 
202-395-7320, or Council on Environmental Quality, telephone 202-456-
6224.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

    Executive Order 13141 builds on U.S. experience with written 
environmental reviews of previous trade agreements, including the North 
American Free Trade Agreement (1991-92 and 1993), the Uruguay Round 
Agreements (1994), and the proposed Accelerated Tariff Liberalization 
initiative with respect to forest products (1999). The Order 
institutionalizes the use of environmental reviews as an important tool 
to help identify potential positive and negative environmental effects 
of certain major trade agreements, and to facilitate consideration of 
appropriate responses where effects are identified. Pursuant to the 
Order, environmental reviews, along with a process of ongoing 
assessment and evaluation, should help shape trade agreements that 
contribute to the broader goal of sustainable development. The Order is 
available on USTR's internet web site at www.ustr.gov.
    USTR and CEQ developed the Guidelines called for by the Order in 
consultation with interested agencies on the Trade Policy Staff 
Committee (TPSC), including the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, 
Energy, Interior, Justice, State, Treasury and Transportation, the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Agency for International 
Development. The TPSC, established under section 242 of the Trade 
Expansion Act of 1962, as amended (19 U.S.C. section 1872), is the 
principal staff-level mechanism for interagency decisionmaking on U.S. 
trade policy. The current participants in the TPSC process for purposes 
of the Guidelines include agencies with relevant environmental, 
economic and foreign policy expertise. See Guidelines, Appendix A.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The basic work of the TPSC is performed by a network of 
staff-level subcommittees and task forces, organized by geographical 
region and/or sector. The committees prepare recommendations on 
subjects within the purview (e.g., instructions to negotiators on 
specific issues relevant to a given trade agreement). These 
recommendations take the form of a paper, which must then be cleared 
by agencies on the TPSC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the process for developing the Guidelines, USTR and CEQ 
sought to involve interested members of the public at significant 
stages. At the outset, USTR and CEQ requested public comment concerning 
issues the agencies should consider in developing the guidelines, and 
received twenty-two sets of written comments. 65 FR 9757 (Feb. 22, 
2000). USTR and CEQ also requested comment on draft guidelines 
published in July, 2000, and received twenty-five sets of written 
comments. 65 FR 42,743 (July 11, 2000). Eight individuals and 
organizations presented testimony with regard to the draft guidelines 
at the August 2 public hearing. All written comments and a

[[Page 79443]]

transcript of the hearing are available for public inspection in USTR's 
reading room located at 600 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20508.
    USTR and CEQ also consulted extensively with the Trade and 
Environmental Policy Advisory Committee (TEPAC), as well as other 
interested advisory committees. TEPAC is part of the trade advisory 
committee system established by Congress to provide private sector 
information and advice on the priorities and direction of U.S. trade 
policy. TEPAC sponsored several workshops on the Guidelines for TEPAC 
members and other participants, which were open to the public. USTR, 
CEQ, and other interested agencies participated in the public 
workshops. TEPAC also submitted a divided recommendation prior to 
publication of the draft Guidelines, and USTR and CEQ consulted 
informally with interested TEPAC members throughout the development of 
the Guidelines.
    In addition, USTR and CEQ drew upon agencies' experience gained to 
date in implementing the Executive Order in the review of the Jordan 
Free Trade Agreement negotiations, see 65 FR 58,342 (September 28, 
2000), and in planning for the review of the Free Trade Area of the 
Americas negotiations. See 65 FR 75,763 (Dec. 4, 2000).

B. Public Comments

    The views of the public played a significant role in shaping the 
final Guidelines. USTR and CEQ benefitted from numerous constructive 
comments provided by the public in written comments and at the August 
2, 2000 hearing. Public views reflected many different perspectives, 
including those of environmental organizations, industry, and 
agriculture.
    Public comments generally supported the overall goals of the 
Executive Order and Guidelines, and noted that the draft Guidelines 
represented a significant step forward toward achieving those goals. 
However, a number of commenters expressed concern that the draft 
Guidelines were insufficiently specific concerning how environmental 
considerations would actually be integrated into the development of 
U.S. trade negotiating objectives. Some of these commenters also 
advocated more robust consideration of alternatives than provided for 
in the draft Guidelines. Some commenters also favored more explicit 
provision for engaging the public early in the negotiating process to 
allow for a meaningful public role in shaping overall trade objectives 
and negotiating positions. In particular, these commenters emphasized 
that early public engagement would assist in identifying ``win-win'' 
opportunities where the opening of markets and reduction or elimination 
of subsidies may yield environmental benefits.
    From another perspective, other commenters were concerned that the 
process outlined in the draft Guidelines was too prescriptive and 
inflexible, and could thus hamper trade negotiators. A number of 
commenters emphasized the need to ensure that reviews would be based on 
an objective, impartial analysis of environmental effects and sound 
scientific principles. They requested that the final Guidelines clarify 
that positive as well as negative impacts would be considered, and 
stressed that all government agencies with relevant expertise and all 
interested advisory committees should be involved in the reviews.
    Commenters differed concerning the degree to which reviews should 
address global and transboundary environmental impacts. Several 
commenters favored creating a presumption in favor of reviewing such 
effects, while others argued that the reviews should normally be 
limited to impacts within the United States.
    Several commenters requested that the final Guidelines provide for 
greater transparency in the negotiation process, including the release 
of draft negotiating texts. While acknowledging that confidentiality 
for some aspects of the negotiation might be appropriate, these 
commenters argued that non-disclosure should be kept to a minimum, and 
that cleared advisors should be used where confidentiality was 
unavoidable.
    Concerning agency roles, a number of commenters contended that CEQ 
and environmental agencies should have a more prominent role in 
conducting the reviews, while others argued that their role should be 
less prominent. Several commenters criticized the way in which 
governmental resource constraints were reflected in the draft 
Guidelines and urged that reviews should not be conditioned on the 
availability of resources.
    Finally, several commenters pointed out that the draft Guidelines 
omitted reference to possible implications of trade agreements for 
state and local (as well as federal) environmental regulatory 
authorities.

C. Principal Revisions to the Draft Guidelines

    The final Guidelines have strengthened and clarified provisions 
pertaining to early and proactive integration of environmental and 
trade policy objectives. Specifically, Sections I and II of the 
Guidelines expressly acknowledge that the written environmental review 
process is not the sole means of integrating environmental concerns and 
goals into a proposed trade agreement, and make clear that public input 
will be sought even where no written environmental review is conducted 
(Section II.7). The final Guidelines also clarify that informal public 
outreach and consultations shall take place at an early stage in the 
review process, and that information received at this stage will be 
used to inform the development of U.S. negotiating objectives and 
positions (Section III, A and B).
    The final Guidelines provide further clarification that reviews 
will consider positive as well as negative potential impacts of trade 
agreements (see, e.g., Section IV.B.2, and Appendix C) and that 
analysis will be objective and scientific (Section V.A.2). Objectivity 
and balance in the reviews are further advanced through the active 
involvement of a broad range of government agencies (Section VIII.A.5) 
and relevant advisory committees (see, e.g., sections VI.6 and IV.4). 
The final Guidelines also provide clarifications regarding possible 
state, local, and tribal governmental regulatory issues (Sections 
IV.B.2.b, V.B.1 and appendix C).
    The final Guidelines make explicit (in a new Section IV.C) that the 
extent of the analysis shall be proportionate to the significance of 
anticipated environmental impacts. Where initial steps in the review 
process indicate that environmental impacts are likely to be de 
minimis, it will normally be appropriate to abbreviate the analysis.
    Concerning global and transboundary impacts, the final Guidelines 
provide some additional clarification to ensure that potential global 
and transboundary impacts are appropriately identified in the scoping 
process (Section V.B.5). However, the general approach of the draft 
Guidelines has been retained in conformity with the Executive Order, 
which provides that the focus of the review should be on impacts in the 
United States, and examination of global and transboundary impacts may 
be included as appropriate and prudent.
    The final Guidelines include a new provision concerning 
transparency and confidentiality in the review process (Section VI.6). 
This is a difficult and complex issue, which has implications beyond 
the scope of the Order and the Guidelines. The United States believes 
that transparency and openness are vital to ensuring public 
understanding and support for international trade policy, and is at the 
forefront of efforts to improve transparency in the world

[[Page 79444]]

trading system. The United States is also committed to keeping the 
public informed about trade negotiations and engaging in regular 
dialogue with interested stakeholders. However, disclosure of certain 
information to foreign governments could compromise the ability of 
trade negotiators to obtain the best outcome for national interest. 
Therefore, it is important to maintain a degree of confidentiality 
concerning development of U.S. negotiating objectives and positions and 
the conduct of negotiations.
    The final Guidelines endeavor to strike a balance between these 
goals. They state that sufficient information shall be provided to the 
public to facilitate understanding and involvement in a meaningful 
manner concerning U.S. negotiating objectives and the environmental 
review process. However, to the extent that disclosure would impair the 
United States' ability to develop negotiating objectives or conduct 
negotiations, or would compromise proprietary or confidential 
information, issues shall be addressed, where appropriate, through the 
advisory committee system of cleared advisors.
    The final Guidelines make clear that CEQ and USTR shall jointly 
oversee the implementation of the Executive Order, including the 
Guidelines, and consult at the outset of each review (Section VIII.A.1, 
5). The final Guidelines also modify references to the role of 
governmental resources (for example, the specific reference to 
resources in connection with consideration of global and transboundary 
effects is deleted, see Section V.B.5). However, because adequate 
resources are critical to the effective implementation of the Order and 
Guidelines, several provisions address the resource issue (Sections 
II.5, VIII.A.2 and 6). Additional language clarifies that agencies 
shall seek adequate resources to carry out their responsibilities 
within their planning budgets (Section VIII.A.6).
    Finally, the Guidelines are intended to be a living document. CEQ 
and USTR retain the ability to revise the Guidelines, in consultation 
with other agencies, advisory committees and the public, as experience 
is gained with applying them to particular reviews (Section VIII.B.1). 
If CEQ and USTR conclude that revision is appropriate, the public shall 
be notified of the intent to revise and be given an opportunity to 
comment on significant revisions.

Carmen Suro-Bredie,
Chair, Trade Policy Staff Committee, Office of the U.S. Trade 
Representative.
Dinah Bear,
General Counsel, Council on Environmental Quality.

Guidelines for Implementation of Executive Order 13141 Council on 
Environmental Quality and the United States Trade Representative

I. Purpose of the Guidelines

    1. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the United States 
Trade Representative (USTR) issue these Guidelines pursuant to 
Executive Order 13141, Environmental Review of Trade Agreements (the 
Order). The purpose of the Guidelines is to implement the Order so as 
to ensure that consideration of reasonably foreseeable environmental 
impacts of trade agreements (both positive and negative), and 
identification of complementarities between trade and environmental 
objectives, are consistent and integral parts of the policymaking 
process.
    2. The primary focus of the Order and these Guidelines is on the 
process for evaluating the environmental implications of certain major 
proposed trade agreements, which will be the subject of written 
environmental reviews (ERs). In addition, as recognized by the Order, 
the broader goal of sustainable development shall also be advanced 
through an ongoing process of assessment, evaluation and public 
consultation by responsible Federal agencies, even where no ER is 
conducted.

II. Environmental Review of Trade Agreements

    1. Section 4(a) of the Order identifies three categories of 
agreements for which an ER is mandated in light of their potential for 
significant environmental impacts: (1) comprehensive multilateral trade 
rounds; (2) bilateral or plurilateral free trade agreements; and (3) 
major new trade liberalization agreements in natural resource sectors.
    2. Section 4(b) of the Order provides that agreements reached in 
connection with enforcement and dispute resolution actions are not 
covered by the Order.
    3. Section 4(c) of the Order provides that ERs may also be 
warranted for other agreements. A decision to initiate the ER process 
for a Section 4(c) agreement shall be based on objective criteria.
    4. The significance of reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts 
shall be an essential factor in determining whether to conduct an ER 
for a section 4(c) agreement. The assessment of this factor shall 
include consideration of the following criteria:
    a. The extent to which the agreement might affect environmentally 
sensitive media and resources and/or result in substantial changes in 
trade flows of products or services that could confer environmental 
harms or benefits;
    b. The extent to which the agreement might affect U.S. 
environmental laws, regulations, policies, and/or international 
commitments;
    c. The magnitude and scope of reasonably foreseeable environmental 
impacts; and
    d. The magnitude of anticipated changes in trade flows.
    5. In certain circumstances, additional factors, such as 
negotiation timetables and the availability of relevant data, 
analytical tools and expertise, may be considered in decisions 
regarding section 4(c) agreements.
    6. The Order anticipates that most sectoral liberalization 
agreements will not require an ER because it is expected that they are 
unlikely to result in significant environmental impacts.
    7. A decision not to conduct an ER for a Section 4(c) agreement 
will not relieve the Federal government of the obligation to consider 
environmental issues under the process of ongoing consultations, 
assessment and evaluation applicable to the negotiation of all trade 
agreements. As part of that process, USTR shall facilitate 
identification of any relevant environmental issues by providing 
opportunities for engaging the public, as well as through the early 
initiation of the Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC) process.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC), established under 
section 242 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended, 19 
U.S.C. section 1872, is the principal staff-level mechanism for 
interagency decisionmaking on U.S. trade policy. The current 
participants in the TPSC process with respect to the implementation 
of these Guidelines include all agencies with relevant 
environmental, economic and foreign policy expertise. See Appendix 
A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. The decision not to conduct an ER for a Section 4(c) agreement 
may be reassessed as appropriate.

III. Initiation of the Environmental Review Process

A. General Principles

    1. The overarching goal of the ER process is to ensure that, 
through the consistent application of principles and procedures, 
environmental considerations are integrated into the development of 
U.S. trade negotiating objectives and positions. The process is 
intended to provide timely information

[[Page 79445]]

that will enable trade policymakers and negotiators to understand the 
environmental implications of possible courses of action.
    2. The goals of the ER process shall be achieved through a variety 
of formal and informal means, flexible enough to accommodate the 
different types of trade agreements and negotiating timetables. Early 
in the negotiating process, public views on the broad objectives of the 
proposed agreement shall be sought through informal public outreach and 
consultation. As more is known about the shape of the proposed 
agreement, the process shall become more formal and analytical, leading 
to the issuance of the written ER documents.
    3. Pursuant to Section 5 of the Order, while an ER shall be 
undertaken sufficiently early in the negotiating process to inform the 
development of negotiating positions, it shall not be a condition for 
the timely tabling of specific negotiating positions.

B. Early Outreach and Consultations

    1. When negotiation of the prospective trade agreement is first 
under consideration, USTR, through the TPSC, shall seek information 
regarding potential environmental concerns and benefits associated with 
the commercial practices and trade policies under consideration. This 
shall be accomplished through an ongoing, flexible process of 
consultation with Congress, the interested public, and advisory 
committees, and, in the normal case, Federal Register notice(s) 
requesting public comment on environmental issues and other issues 
concerning the negotiations. See Appendix B.
    2. By virtue of their relevant expertise, TPSC agencies play an 
important role in the development of trade policies and objectives. 
Accordingly, throughout the ER process they shall provide analytical 
expertise and shall bring important environmental issues to the 
attention of the relevant TPSC subcommittee(s) in a timely manner.
    3. The environmental information developed in this early stage 
shall inform the development of U.S. negotiating objectives and 
positions.

C. Initiating the Written Environmental Review

    1. USTR, through the TPSC, shall initiate the formal written ER 
process with a notice in the Federal Register as soon as possible once 
sufficient information exists concerning the scope of the proposed 
trade agreement, allowing for the meaningful evaluation of its 
potential environmental ramifications. See Appendix B.
    2. Environmental issues shall be analyzed by the relevant TPSC 
subcommittee(s) or, as appropriate, by a working group under the 
subcommittee(s). For purposes of these Guidelines, the term 
Environmental Review Group (ERG) refers to any TPSC group tasked with 
the environmental review of trade agreements under these Guidelines.
    3. In order to expedite the initiation of the ER process for a 
particular trade agreement, it may be desirable to analyze discrete 
aspects of the proposed agreement as sufficient information becomes 
available. In all cases, the final ER document should address 
identified environmental issues in a comprehensive manner.
    4. For some agreements that fall under Section 4(c) of the 
Executive Order, the need for an ER may not be identified until after 
specific negotiating positions have been established or are under 
development. In such cases, the ER process shall be initiated as soon 
as feasible thereafter.

IV. Determining the Scope of the Environmental Review

A. General Principles

    1. The scoping process involves the identification of significant 
issues to be analyzed in depth in the written ER, along with the 
elimination from detailed study of those issues which are not 
significant or have been covered by prior reviews.
    2. The early involvement of agencies with relevant expertise and 
the public in the scoping process helps assure that analysis is 
adequate and that issues are identified in a timely manner.
    3. Scoping includes consideration of the environmental dimensions 
of the commercial practices and trade policies at issue, including ways 
in which the potential trade agreement can complement U.S. 
environmental objectives.
    4. USTR, through the TPSC, shall request public comment on the 
scope of the ER through the Federal Register Notice of Intent to 
Initiate Environmental Review, and shall seek the views of interested 
advisory committees, including the Trade and Environment Policy 
Advisory Committee (TEPAC). See Section VI and Appendix B.

B. The Scoping Process

1. Overview
    a. The scoping process for the ER has two principal components: (i) 
identification of issues; and (ii) selection and prioritization of 
issues for review. The first component focuses on soliciting input and 
determining the types of environmental impacts that could result from 
the proposed trade agreement. The second component focuses on selecting 
and prioritizing the significant issues that should be analyzed to 
determine the environmental consequences of the trade agreement, if 
any. The result of an effective scoping process is a targeted, 
analytical work plan.
    b. Issue identification and prioritization is an iterative process. 
Negotiating positions are likely to undergo continual adjustment until 
the agreement is completed. The steps taken to establish the scope of 
the ER may, therefore, be revisited throughout the negotiations.
2. Identification of Issues
    a. This step in the scoping process is meant to identify the range 
of possible environmental impacts (both positive and negative) 
associated with the trade agreement under consideration. However, not 
all issues identified will necessarily be analyzed in the ER. The 
second step in the scoping process, issue selection and prioritization 
(described below), will be used to select important issues warranting 
further analysis.
    b. Solicitation of Information
    (1) The scoping process shall draw upon the knowledge of any agency 
with relevant expertise in the subject matter under consideration, as 
well as the views of Congress, the public, and advisory committees.
    (2) Where matters affecting state, local and tribal government 
regulatory authority may be at issue, USTR shall consult with the 
Intergovernmental Policy Advisory Committee (IGPAC) and other 
appropriate sources of information.
3. Information Relevant to Scoping
    a. Three types of information shall be considered when determining 
the scope of the ER:
    (1) the scope and objectives of the proposed trade agreement;
    (2) a realistic range of alternative approaches for accomplishing 
the broad objectives of the trade agreement; and
    (3) types of reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts.
    b. Ascertaining the Scope of the Proposed Trade Agreement
    (1) The scope of the ER is a function of the scope and objectives 
of the proposed trade agreement and the range of realistic approaches 
for achieving those objectives. Thus, there should be a close and 
interactive relationship

[[Page 79446]]

between the ERG and the TPSC subcommittee(s) responsible for the 
negotiation.
    (2) The ERG shall maintain continuing awareness of U.S. negotiating 
goals as they evolve and ensure that the scope of the ER properly 
reflects emerging environmental issues.
    c. Ascertaining Options for Analysis
    (1) Scoping shall be used to assist in identifying possible 
alternative negotiating approaches and options for accomplishing the 
broad objectives of the trade agreement, including approaches for 
achieving environmental benefits. Options may also include 
consideration of methods for addressing positive and negative 
environmental impacts.
    (2) The scoping process shall be used to gain an understanding of 
options or approaches reflecting a realistic range of possible 
negotiating outcomes. However, the options analyzed during the ER 
process shall not constrain trade negotiators from considering others.
    d. Ascertaining Reasonably Foreseeable Environmental Impacts
    (1) During the initial stages of scoping, a range of reasonably 
foreseeable environmental impacts (both positive and negative) should 
be considered for inclusion in the ER. See Appendix C. Later, as 
scoping progresses, some of the identified impacts may be eliminated 
from consideration through the process of prioritization and analysis 
described below.
    (2) Domestic impacts are necessarily the primary concern and 
priority for an ER conducted under the Executive Order and these 
Guidelines. However, the scoping process shall also consider, pursuant 
to Section IV.B.5, whether it is appropriate and prudent to examine 
global and transboundary impacts.
    (3) Consistent with existing legal requirements, the ERG may 
consult with academic, federal, state or local entities, and/or other 
interested groups that have relevant experience with economic and 
environmental analyses and modeling techniques.
4. Selection and Prioritization of Issues and Considerations for 
Establishing Scope
    a. Once environmental issues have been sufficiently identified, the 
ERG shall select and prioritize the issues and establish the scope of 
the ER.
    b. Considerations for establishing ER scope include:
    (1) the perceived significance of potential environmental impacts;
    (2) the relative importance placed on a particular issue by 
governmental agencies, the public, and/or advisory committees;
    (3) availability of analytical tools capable of assessing 
environmental impacts at an adequate level of detail;
    (4) existence of opportunities for building on, or incorporating by 
reference, work already performed or being performed elsewhere in the 
interagency process, so that the ER is not duplicative of other 
efforts.
5. Special Considerations for the Scoping of Global and Transboundary 
Impacts
    (1) The scoping process for every ER shall be used to identify 
whether reasonably foreseeable global and transboundary impacts might 
be associated with the proposed trade agreement.
    (2) Evaluation of whether it is appropriate and prudent to analyze 
global and transboundary impacts in the ER shall include consideration 
of the following:
    (a) scope and magnitude of reasonably foreseeable global and 
transboundary impacts;
    (b) implications for U.S. interests, including international 
commitments and programs for international cooperation;
    (c) availability of relevant data and analytic tools for addressing 
impacts outside the United States, including reviews performed by other 
countries involved in negotiations or by regional or international 
organizations; and
    (d) diplomatic considerations.

C. Outcome of the Scoping Process

    1. Once the scoping process has identified and prioritized 
significant issues that warrant further analysis, the ERG shall plan 
how to proceed, taking into account that the analysis should be 
proportionate to the significance of anticipated impacts. Where initial 
steps in the ER process indicate that environmental impacts are likely 
to be de minimis, it will normally be appropriate to abbreviate the 
analysis.

V. Analytical Content of the Review

A. General Principles

    1. Since trade agreements exhibit broad variation, it is likely 
that each ER will incorporate uniquely tailored analytical approaches. 
A different mix of analytical methodologies may be needed for different 
types of trade agreements.
    2. The analysis shall entail an objective, rigorous assessment of 
the environmental issues under consideration, and shall be based on 
scientific information and principles, documented experience and 
objective data. Analysis shall normally be both qualitative and 
quantitative. The analytical process should take into consideration 
assumptions and/or uncertainty in the data and methodologies and 
document limitations due to those assumptions or uncertainties.
    3. Agencies shall use best efforts to identify sources of data and 
analytical methodologies available within and outside of the U.S. 
government, which would then provide a foundation for subsequent 
specific environmental reviews. A list of such sources shall be created 
and made available to the public. The list may be updated over time, 
including on the basis of public comments.

B. Analysis of Implications for Environmental Laws and Regulations

    1. The ER shall examine the extent to which the proposed trade 
agreement may have implications for U.S. environmental regulations, 
statutes and other obligations and instruments. The ER should also 
analyze, as appropriate, any implications that the agreement may have 
regarding the ability of state, local, and tribal authorities to 
regulate with respect to environmental matters.
    2. Examples of possible regulatory implications include impacts on 
the ability to maintain, strengthen and enforce laws, regulations and 
policies on pollution control; control of toxic and hazardous wastes 
and materials; protection of natural resources, wildlife and endangered 
species; relevant product standards; control and regulation of 
pesticides; food safety; and the public's ability to obtain information 
regarding the environment.

C. Analysis of Economically Driven Environmental Impacts

    1. The ER shall examine the extent to which positive and negative 
environmental impacts may flow from economic changes estimated to 
result from the trade agreement. See Appendix C.
    2. Application of modeling techniques may provide a useful approach 
for estimating such environmental impacts. However, modeling and other 
economic analytical techniques, in and of themselves, are unlikely to 
provide an exclusive means for assessing areas of environmental 
concern. For example, prevailing tools for assessing the economic 
effect of comprehensive trade agreements rely on aggregation of 
resource sectors to estimate broad trends, while estimates of 
environmental impact generally benefit from a more local or regional 
analysis.

[[Page 79447]]

    3. Environmental impacts shall be analyzed in comparison to a base 
or baseline scenario. A baseline comparison shall take into account 
those changes that are likely to occur in the economy and the 
environment even in the absence of the proposed trade agreement.

D. Identifying Ways To Address Environmental Impacts

    1. Key findings and supporting analysis of the ER shall be made 
widely available to trade negotiators of the proposed agreement, as 
well as to trade and environmental policymakers throughout the 
government.
    2. Where significant regulatory and/or economically driven 
environmental impacts have been identified, there shall be an analysis 
of options to mitigate negative impacts and create or enhance positive 
impacts. Options may include changes to negotiating positions as well 
as environmental policy responses outside the trade agreement, such as 
seeking possible changes to relevant U.S. domestic and international 
environmental policies.
    3. Where options that address identified impacts are described in 
the ER document, they may include options for post-agreement actions 
for agencies to consider, such as actions to assess the accuracy of the 
analysis.

VI. Public Participation

    1. Provision for public participation in the review and assessment 
of environmental impacts of trade agreements is an essential component 
of these Guidelines, and is meant to ensure that the public and the 
government benefit from an open and inclusive process of trade policy 
development.
    2. In addition to the public, advisory committees and Congress 
shall regularly be consulted.
    3. Procedures for public participation should be flexible, not 
excessively burdensome, and responsive to needs for expedited action 
and confidentiality. The period for public comment shall normally be 
forty-five days, unless a shorter or longer period is appropriate.
    4. Requests for public comment shall be far enough in advance of 
critical junctures in the negotiation so that, to the extent 
practicable, the public has a reasonable opportunity to prepare and 
submit comments to be taken into account during the ER process. 
Appendix B provides guidance on the types and content of public 
notification and participation.
    5. Public hearings, notices in relevant publications, website 
postings, and other mechanisms shall be employed as appropriate and 
feasible. When the negotiating timetable permits, a public hearing or 
hearings shall normally be conducted.
    6. Consistent with the United States' commitment to transparency 
and openness in the conduct of trade negotiations, sufficient 
information shall be provided to the public to facilitate understanding 
and involvement in a meaningful manner concerning U.S. negotiating 
objectives and the ER process. To the extent that such disclosure would 
impair the United States' ability to develop negotiating objectives or 
conduct negotiations, or would compromise proprietary or confidential 
information, issues shall be addressed, where appropriate, through the 
advisory committee system of cleared advisors.

VII. Documentation of the Environmental Review Process

A. General Principles

    1. Documentation is important for memorializing the ER process and 
explaining the rationale for the conclusions reached. Documentation 
also provides opportunities for integrating environmental 
considerations into negotiating positions. To that end, the Draft ER 
document, along with public comments, shall serve as one key means of 
informing the negotiation process.
    2. In addition to informing the public, Final ER documents should 
serve as points of reference for subsequent ERs so that lessons can be 
learned and information drawn from the effort.
    3. In order to factor environmental considerations into the 
development of trade negotiations, relevant steps and work products in 
the ER process should be undertaken sufficiently early to be of benefit 
to U.S. trade negotiators in developing negotiating positions.
    4. Confidentiality concerns shall be taken into account when 
developing the Draft and Final ER documents and preparing them for 
public release.

B. The Environmental Review Documents

    1. Consistency in the ER process, to the extent feasible given the 
variations in trade agreements, should be reflected through a 
consistent documentation format and content. Appendix D provides 
information on the structure and content that shall normally be 
followed for Draft and Final ER documents.
    2. All ER documents shall be written in plain language and shall 
provide the rationale for the scope of the review and the selected 
methodology. ER documents shall also include a summary of key points 
raised in public comments.
    3. A Draft ER document shall normally be prepared and provided to 
the public for comment. However, in unusual circumstances, such as when 
a trade agreement is to be completed under a compressed negotiating 
schedule, it may not be possible to produce a Draft ER document. In 
such cases, the Final ER document shall be issued publicly as soon as 
is feasible following the conclusion of the trade agreement.
    4. When environmental implications that are substantially different 
from those analyzed in the Draft ER document emerge in the course of 
negotiations, an amended ER document may be prepared and made available 
to the public, as USTR deems appropriate through the TPSC process.

VIII. Administrative Considerations

A. Roles and Responsibilities

    1. CEQ and USTR shall jointly oversee the implementation of the 
Executive Order, including these Guidelines.
    2. Regardless of whether a written ER is mandated, USTR shall 
initiate the TPSC process for examining environmental issues as early 
as feasible in the consideration of potential trade agreements. For 
those agreements falling within the 4(c) category, USTR, through the 
TPSC, shall also determine whether an agreement warrants an ER and as 
part of that decision identify the resources available to perform the 
ER. For those agreements subject to a mandatory ER, resources available 
to perform the review shall be identified at the time of initiation of 
the ER process.
    3. The decision whether to proceed with an ER shall be reflected in 
the TPSC paper(s) initiating negotiations. These paper(s) shall 
include, as appropriate, discussion of the environmental issues 
identified at this early stage in the TPSC process, and recommendations 
on how they should be addressed. Where relevant, subsequent TPSC papers 
shall include information regarding the findings of ERs and other 
environmental assessments and evaluations undertaken.
    4. USTR, through the TPSC, shall conduct the ER. Environmental 
issues shall be analyzed by the ERG. Membership in the ERG shall be 
open to all interested agencies, and shall include, at a minimum, those 
agencies with relevant expertise in economic and environmental 
assessment.
    5. USTR shall consult with CEQ at the outset of each environmental 
review. CEQ and agencies with environmental

[[Page 79448]]

expertise shall play a prominent role in the conduct of the reviews. 
Environmental agencies shall be principally responsible for providing 
the expertise necessary to analyze impacts on environmental media and 
natural resources within their areas of specialization. Similarly, the 
expertise of economic agencies shall be drawn upon where appropriate, 
and they shall be primarily responsible for identifying the economic 
changes likely to flow from a proposed agreement.
    6. Effective implementation of the Order and Guidelines depends 
upon the availability of adequate resources and the full engagement of 
all agencies with relevant expertise. USTR, CEQ, and all Federal 
agencies subject to the Order shall seek adequate resources to carry 
out their responsibilities under the Order. Budget requests through OMB 
in support of these Guidelines must be written within each agency's 
planning guidance level. Upon request from USTR, with the concurrence 
of the Deputy Director for Management of the Office of Management and 
Budget, Federal agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law and 
subject to the availability of appropriations, provide analytical and 
financial resources and support, including the detail of appropriate 
personnel to USTR to carry out these Guidelines.

B. Implementation and Oversight

    1. CEQ and USTR shall jointly exercise general oversight of the 
implementation of these Guidelines including their periodic review and 
update as necessary. If USTR and CEQ conclude that revision is 
appropriate, the public shall be notified of the intent to revise and 
be provided with an opportunity to comment on significant revisions.
    2. These Guidelines are intended only to improve the internal 
management of the executive branch and do not create any right, 
benefit, trust or responsibility, substantive or procedural, 
enforceable at law or equity by a party against the United States, its 
agencies, its officers or any person.

Appendix A

Participants in the Trade Policy Staff Committee Process for Purposes 
of the Guidelines

Chair

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative

Statutory Members

U.S. Department of Agriculture
U.S. Department of Commerce
U.S. Department of Labor
U.S. Department of State
U.S. Department of the Treasury

Invited Members

Council of Economic Advisers
Council on Environmental Quality
National Economic Council/National Security Council
Office of Management and Budget
U.S. Agency for International Development
U.S. Department of Defense
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services/Food and Drug 
Administration
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Department of Justice
U.S. Department of Transportation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Advisory Member

U.S. International Trade Commission

Appendix B

Public Notification and Participation Considerations

    This appendix provides details on the format for particular 
elements of public participation described in the Guidelines. The 
time between key steps in the trade negotiation process will vary 
depending on the type and scope of the proposed agreement as well as 
the dynamics of the negotiation. For that reason, the precise number 
and timing of Federal Register notices and other mechanisms for 
public participation cannot be prescribed with specificity, and 
notices may be combined with Federal Register notices issued for 
other purposes (such as requests for comment on broader issues in 
the negotiations). Federal Register notices shall normally be posted 
on USTR's internet website.

I. Minimum Requirements for Public Participation in Environmental 
Review Process

A. At a minimum, the public shall be involved at the following 
stages of the Environmental Review Process:

1. Notice of Intent to Conduct Environmental Review
2. Notice of Intent to Initiate Environmental Review and Request for 
Comments on the Scope of Environmental Review
3. Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Review document 
and Request for Comments (in the normal case where a draft ER 
document is prepared for public comment)
4. Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Review document

B. USTR shall also normally seek public views on environmental 
issues through regular consultations with Congress, advisory 
committees and the interested public.

II. Guidance for Particular Public Notifications

A. Notice of Intent to Conduct Environmental Review

    1. USTR shall notify the public of a decision to conduct an 
Environmental Review of the agreement.

B. Notice of Intent to Initiate Environmental Review and Request 
for Comments on Scope of Environmental Review

    1. The notice and request shall normally provide information on 
the following subjects:
    a. key U.S. negotiating objectives,
    b. the elements and topics expected to be under consideration 
for coverage by the proposed agreement,
    c. the countries expected to participate in the agreement,
    d. the sectors of the U.S. economy likely to be affected (if 
known),
    e. environmental issues already identified through the TPSC 
process and/or public input as potentially significant.
    2. It may also be appropriate to request additional comments on 
the scope of the environmental review as new information emerges 
and/or negotiating objectives shift.

C. Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Review Document 
and Request for Comments

    1. In the normal circumstance, where a Draft ER document is 
prepared for public distribution, the Draft ER document shall be 
made available to the public through publication of a notice of 
availability in the Federal Register and posting on the USTR 
website. Comments from the public will be requested.

D. Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Review Document

    1. The Final ER document shall be made available to the public 
through publication of a notice of availability in the Federal 
Register and posting on the USTR website.

E. Availability of Public Comments

    1. Public comments on environmental issues relating to the 
particular trade agreement and the Draft ER shall be available for 
public review in the USTR reading room, located at 600 17th Street 
NW., Washington, DC 20508.

[[Page 79449]]

F. Revision of Guidelines

    1. USTR and CEQ, in consultation with interested agencies, may 
on occasion find it appropriate to revise and/or update these 
Guidelines. When USTR and CEQ are considering a significant revision 
of the Guidelines, the public shall be notified of the intent to 
revise and given an opportunity to comment on any significant 
revisions.

Appendix C

Types of Potential Environmental Impacts for Consideration

    This appendix provides a list that may be useful for identifying 
the range of reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts arising 
from a proposed trade agreement. This list is illustrative and is 
intended to provide a general frame of reference for assisting in 
establishing the scope of the ER. The scope of any review must be 
determined on a case-by-case basis and all reasonably foreseeable 
environmental effects--both positive and negative--should be 
considered during scoping for the environmental review regardless of 
whether they are included on this list.
    Scoping with respect to economic effects typically will be 
conducted through an iterative exchange between those responsible 
for economic analysis and those with expertise in various areas of 
environmental concern. Similarly, with respect to the potential 
effects of proposed trade disciplines on environmental laws and 
regulations, the scoping will typically involve an iterative 
exchange between those expert in the development, implementation, 
and interpretation of trade texts and those expert in various fields 
of environmental knowledge.

I. Regulatory Effects

    A. Potential positive and negative implications of the proposed 
trade agreement for U.S. environmental regulations, statutes, and 
binding obligations such as multilateral environmental agreements, 
as well as potential implications for the ability of state, local 
and tribal authorities to regulate with respect to environmental 
matters.
    B. Potential positive and negative implications of the proposed 
trade agreement for environmental policy instruments and other 
environmental commitments.

II. Economic Effects (Compared to a Base or Projected Baseline)

    A. Products, processes, or sectors that may be positively or 
negatively affected by the proposed trade agreement, including the 
effects of increases or decreases in the diffusion of environmental 
products and technologies.
    B. Changes in types or characteristics of goods and services and 
their distribution.
    C. Changes in volume, pattern, and modes of transportation 
(e.g., increased or decreased potential for spread of invasive 
species, or increased or decreased pollution impacts of 
transportation equipment and infrastructure).
    D. Structural changes (e.g., increased or decreased efficiency 
in natural resource use)
    E. Technology effects involving changes in the process of 
production, including increased or decreased use of environmentally 
responsible technology.

III. Environmental Effects (Related to Economic Effects Identified 
Above)

    A. Changes in level, intensity, geographic distribution and 
temporal scope of variables used to measure the affected environment 
in comparison with base values (using either base year or baseline 
trend as appropriate).
    B. Interaction of trade-related impacts with other impacts on 
the relevant media or resources.
    C. Environmental effects resulting from changes of standards 
that stem from economic effects.

IV. Increased or Decreased Impacts on Environmental Media and Resources

    A. Air quality and atmosphere (including climate, ozone).
    B. Fresh water quality and resources (including both surface and 
ground), soil retention and quality.
    C. Protected or environmentally sensitive terrestrial and marine 
areas (e.g., national parks, national wildlife refuges, wetlands, 
marine sanctuaries).
    D. Endangered species and other species identified as 
significant under law (e.g., certain marine mammals, migratory 
birds).
    E. Marine, aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity, including 
species, genetic variety and ecosystems and the potential for 
invasive species to compromise such biodiversity; also ecosystem 
productivity and integrity, living resources and ecosystem services.
    F. Environmental quality related to human health, including 
changes in environmental exposure to toxic substances (e.g., 
increases or decreases in exposure to pesticide residues on food).
    G. Transboundary and global impacts may include those on:
    1. Places not subject to national jurisdiction or subject to 
shared jurisdiction, such as Antarctica, the atmosphere (including 
ozone and climate change features), outer space, and the high seas;
    2. Migratory species, including straddling and highly migratory 
fish stocks and migratory mammals;
    3. Impacts relating to environmental issues identified by the 
international community as having a global dimension and warranting 
a global response;
    4. Transboundary impacts involving the boundaries of the United 
States;
    5. Environmental resources and issues otherwise of concern to 
the United States.

Appendix D

Structure and Content of Environmental Review Documents

    This appendix provides details on the structure and content of 
the Draft and Final environmental review documents. In certain 
circumstances (e.g., where confidentiality is appropriate, or where 
there is a compressed negotiation timetable), it may be necessary to 
adopt a modified documentation format. However, each ER document 
shall normally contain the following sections:

(1) Summary
(2) Table of Contents
(3) Objectives of the Proposed Trade Agreement
(4) Scope of Review
(5) Analysis
(6) Findings and Conclusions
(7) Appendices

I. Guidance for Particular ER Document Sections

    A. The Objectives section of the ER document should present an 
overview of the goals and negotiating history of the particular 
trade agreement under consideration. This section may highlight the 
perceived benefits of the agreement and related objectives for 
pursuing it.
    B. The Scope of Review section should describe the principal 
potential environmental impacts and/or regulatory issues or types of 
laws and regulations identified in the scoping process. This section 
should not be a compendium of all potential impacts, but only those 
considered sufficiently important to warrant consideration for 
including in the ER analysis. This section of the ER document should 
also provide a brief presentation of the rationale employed during 
the issue prioritization process and the criteria used for 
establishing the scope of the ER and eliminating issues deemed 
irrelevant.
    C. The Analysis section of the document should describe the 
expected beneficial and adverse impacts of those negotiating options 
or approaches selected for review, which should be compared to a 
base or baseline scenario that estimates conditions that would exist 
in the absence of the proposed trade agreement. The described 
impacts should include both beneficial and adverse impacts. This 
section should summarize the analytical methodology used in 
determining the environmental impacts, including assumptions made 
and uncertainties in the data and methodology (a description of the 
methodology may more appropriately be provided in an appendix). This 
section should also describe proposed options (if any) for 
addressing potential negative impacts and/or for enhancing benefits 
of the proposed trade agreement.
    D. The Conclusions section of the document should summarize the 
potential environmental impacts expected from the proposed trade 
agreement, and may present options for addressing those impacts. 
This section of the document may also include discussion of any 
post-agreement actions when responsible agencies determine that such 
actions are warranted or desirable.
    E. The number and nature of Appendices for each ER document will 
vary according to the nature of the trade agreement under review. In 
general, the use of appendices is encouraged whenever inclusion of 
technical and/or supporting data would improve clarity and aid in 
the understanding of the review process. At a minimum, a summary of 
key issues identified by the public during the ER process should be 
included as an appendix of both the Draft and Final ER documents.

[FR Doc. 00-32238 Filed 12-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-01-U