Text - Treaty Document: Senate Consideration of Treaty Document 107-5All Information (Except Treaty Text)

A Senate treaty document provides the text of the treaty as transmitted to the Senate, as well as the transmittal letter from the President, the submittal letter from the Secretary of State, and accompanying papers.

Text of Treaty Document available as:

For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.

[Senate Treaty Document 107-5]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

107th Congress                                              Treaty Doc.
 2d Session                                                    107-5








                   DONE AT STOCKHOLM, MAY 22-23, 2001

May 7, 2002.--Convention was read the first time, and together with the 
accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and 
            ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate


99-118                     WASHINGTON : 2002

                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL


                                      The White House, May 6, 2002.
To the Senate of the United States:
    With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the 
Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Stockholm 
Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, with Annexes, done 
at Stockholm, May 22-23, 2001. The report of the Secretary of 
State is also enclosed for the information of the Senate.
    The Convention, which was negotiated under the auspices of 
the United Nations Environment Program with the leadership and 
active participation of the United States, commits Parties to 
take significant steps, similar to those already taken by the 
United States, to eliminate or restrict the production, use, 
and/or release of 12 specified persistent organic pollutants 
(POPs). When I announced that the United States would sign the 
Convention, I noted that POPs chemicals, even when released 
abroad, can harm human health and the environment in the United 
States. The Convention obligates Parties to take measures to 
eliminate or restrict the production, use, and trade of 
intentionally produced POPs, to develop action plans to address 
the release of unintentionally produced POPs, and to use best 
available techniques to reduce emissions from certain new 
sources of unintentionally produced POPs. It also includes 
obligations on the treatment of POPs stockpiles and wastes, as 
well as a science-based procedure to add new chemicals that 
meet defined criteria.
    The United States, with the assistance and cooperation of 
nongovernmental organizations and industry, plays an important 
international leadership role in the safe management of 
hazardous chemicals and pesticides. This Convention, which will 
bring over time, an end to the production and use of certain of 
these toxic chemicals beyond our borders, will positively 
affect the U.S. environment and public health. All relevant 
Federal agencies support early ratification of the Convention 
for these reasons, and we understand that affected industries 
and interest groups share this view.
    I recommend that the Senate give prompt and favorable 
consideration to the Convention and give its advice and consent 
to ratification, subject to the understandings described in the 
accompanying report of the Secretary of State, at the earliest 
possible date.
                                                    George W. Bush.
                           LETTER OF SUBMITTAL


                                                    August 1, 2001.
The President,
The White House.
    The President: I have the honor to submit to you the 
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, with 
Annexes, done at Stockholm, May 22-23, 2001. In accordance with 
your announcement on April 19, the United States signed the 
Convention, subject to ratification, on May 23, 2001, along 
with 90 other States. I recommend that the Convention be 
transmitted on a priority basis to the Senate for its advice 
and consent to ratification.
    Chemical synthesis and production advances have been 
responsible for many important benefits currently enjoyed by 
modern society. However, as scientific knowledge about these 
substances has increased, it has become clear that the 
continued production and use of certain chemicals and 
pesticides with particular traits carries with it inherent 
risks and poses both environmental and health hazards. The 
chemicals of global concern that are the subject of this 
Convention are often referred to as persistent organic 
pollutants (POPs). These harmful chemicals share four basic 
characteristics that cause them to adversely affect human 
health and the environment: (1) they are toxic; (2) they 
persist in the environment for long periods of time; (3) they 
circulate globally through the atmosphere and oceans to regions 
far from their source of origin; and (4) they biomagnify as 
they move up through the food chain, accumulating in the fatty 
tissue of higher organisms, including in other foods consumed 
by Americans.
    There is evidence of continuing transboundary deposition of 
POPs chemicals far from their sources. Indigenous people in 
Alaska and elsewhere in the United States are particularly at 
risk due to their reliance on a subsistence diet. This 
Convention will reduce or eliminate certain POPs that continue 
to be released outside the United States and which pose a 
threat to U.S. public health and the environment.
    The United States has already taken substantial action to 
address the risks associated with those POPs chemicals 
currently covered by the Convention. Many other countries, 
including some developing countries, have also taken steps to 
address these risks. Nonetheless, certain of these chemicals 
continue to be used and produced, mostly in developing 
    The Convention commits Parties to take significant steps, 
similar to those already taken by the United States, to 
eliminate or restrict the production, use and/or release of 
specified POPs. It initially identifies twelve chemicals, often 
referred to as the ``dirty dozen.'' Several of these are 
intentionally produced for use either as pesticides or 
industrial chemicals (e.g., DDT); some are produced and 
released as incidental byproducts of other processes (e.g., 
dioxin). Under the Convention, all of the intentionally 
produced POPs except DDT are slated for elimination of 
production and use. In recognition of the humanitarian need to 
use DDT for disease vector control, notably to fight malaria, 
the Convention allows its use for this purpose, while 
encouraging the development of effective and economically 
viable alternatives. The Convention obligates Parties to 
develop action plans to address the release of byproduct POPs 
and to use best available techniques to reduce emissions from 
certain new sources of such POPs. It also imposes controls on 
the handling of POPs wastes and on trade in POPs chemicals. 
Additionally, it includes a science-based procedure to add new 
chemicals that meet defined criteria to the lists of POPs 
subject to the Convention.
    The Convention does not differentiate in its basic 
obligations between developing and developed countries. The 
Convention does establish a flexible framework to provide 
technical and financial assistance to help developing countries 
implement their commitments.
    The United States played a leading role in negotiating the 
Convention, which was developed under the auspices of the 
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). Throughout the 
negotiations, the Department of State and interested Federal 
agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 
theDepartment of Commerce, the United States Trade 
Representative, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the 
Department of Agriculture, consulted with the Congress, industry and 
environmental organizations. The relevant Federal agencies support 
expeditious ratification of the Convention by the United States. The 
Convention has the strong support of U.S. industry and environmental 
    The following analysis reviews the Convention's key 
provisions and sets forth the proposed understandings of the 
United States with respect to several elements.


    The preamble highlights the key reasons for global action 
on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), including their 
capacity for long-range transport and bioaccumulation; their 
potential negative effects on human health and the environment, 
and the particular risks they pose for developing countries, 
Arctic ecosystems, indigenous communities (through POPs 
contained in their traditional foods), women and, through them, 
future generations. The preamble also includes language on 
precaution, which is consistent with the U.S. view that the 
Convention embodies a precautionary approach to protect health 
and the environment.

                          article 1--objective

    Article 1 identifies the objective of the Convention: to 
protect human health and the environment from persistent 
organic pollutants.

                         article 2--definitions

    There are only three definitions in this Article: 
``Party''; ``Regional economic integration organization''; and 
``Parties present and voting''. These definitions are self-
explanatory and consistent with usage in other multilateral 
environmental agreements to which the United States is a party. 
It should be noted that, with respect to obligations that 
require Parties to take action on chemicals listed in Annexes 
A, B or C, the term ``Party'' includes only those Parties that 
are bound by particular listings for chemicals that are added 
in the future. In order to make this definition clear, it is 
recommended that the following understanding be included in the 
U.S. instrument of ratification:

          The United States understands that the term ``Party'' 
        as defined in Article 2 includes only those Parties 
        that are bound by particular listings for chemicals 
        that are added in the future to Annexes A, B or C with 
        respect to the obligations to take action on those 

 article 3--measures to reduce or eliminate releases from intentional 
                           production and use

    Article 3, together with Annexes A and B, contains core 
obligations in the Convention regarding controls and 
intentionally produced POPs chemicals. Paragraph 1 requires 
each Party to ``[p]rohibit and/or take the legal and 
administrative measures necessary to eliminate'' the production 
and use of chemicals listed in Annex A, and to ``restrict'' 
production and use of chemicals listed in Annex B. Annexes A 
and B include 10 intentionally produced pesticides and 
industrial chemicals. Aldrin, chlordane, dieldrin, endrin, 
heptachlor, hexachlorobenzene, mirex, toxaphene, and PCBs are 
placed in Annex A. DDT is placed on Annex B. Time-limited 
country-specific exemptions are allowed for the use, production 
and trade of some chemicals in Annex A. There are also certain 
general exemptions for chemicals listed on Annexes A and B, and 
language addressing the special case of PCBs in Annex A and DDT 
in Annex B, described below.
    The United States is in large part already fulfilling the 
obligations in paragraph 1, either because it has taken the 
legal and administrative measures necessary to eliminate 
production and use of the listed chemicals, or because nearly 
all production and use of these chemicals have otherwise 
ceased. For example, none of the listed chemicals are currently 
registered under U.S. law for use as pesticides in the United 
    At the same time, certain limitations to the existing 
authorities under the main U.S. statutes in this area--namely, 
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 
(``FIFRA''), 7 U.S.C. Sec. 136 et. seq., and the Toxic 
Substances Control Act (``TSCA''), 15 U.S.C. Sec. 2601 et 
seq.--exist with regard to implementation of discrete 
obligations in Article 3. For example, U.S. law currently does 
not provide unambiguous authority to prevent production of all 
POPs chemicals for export. In addition, two of the listed POPs 
chemicals (DDT and HCB) theoretically are eligible for 
production under TSCA under certain circumstances without prior 
notice, although no such production is known to occur in the 
United States. New production and use of the other listed POPs 
chemicals theoretically could be proposed in the future, and 
their prohibition cannot be guaranteed under existing law. 
Targeted, legislative authority therefore will be sought to 
ensure the U.S. ability to implement in full the obligations on 
all production and use of the listed POPs.
    Paragraph 2 places restrictions on the import and export of 
chemicals listed in Annexes A and B. Paragraph 2(a) requires 
each Party to take measures to ensure that a chemical is 
imported only for environmentally sound disposal or for a use 
or purpose permitted under Annex A or B. Paragraph 2(b) 
restricts exports both to other Parties and to non-Parties to 
the Convention. Annex A and B chemicals can be exported only: 
(i) for environmentally sound disposal; (ii) to another Party 
permitted to use the chemical under Annexes A or B; or (iii) to 
a State not Party to the Convention, provided that the non-
Party has provided an annual certification to the exporting 
Party. That certification must address the non-Party's intended 
use of the chemical and its commitment to minimize or prevent 
releases of the chemical and to dispose of any wastes in an 
environmentally sound manner. In addition, exports of chemicals 
listed in Annex A are prohibited to both Parties and non-
Parties, except for environmentally sound disposal, once there 
are no longer any specific exemptions in effect for any Party 
regarding that chemical.
    The United States presently is unaware of any U.S. 
production or export of the listed POPs chemicals that 
conflicts with Article 3 obligations. Nevertheless, additional 
legislative authority is required to ensure the United States' 
ability to implement effectively the export-related obligations 
in paragraph 2. As noted above, for example, FIFRA does not 
provide authority to prohibit all exports of POPs pesticides 
from the United States. Additional authority will also be 
sought to address certain narrow exceptions in FIFRA and TSCA 
with respect to the import-related obligations in paragraph 2.
    Paragraph 3 requires each Party that has regulatory and 
assessment schemes for new pesticides or industrial chemicals 
to take measures to regulate, with the aim of preventing, the 
production and use of new POPs. The United States will 
implement this obligation through measures, including some that 
are already in place, aimed at preventing new persistent, 
bioaccumulative, and toxic (``PBT'') chemicals from entering 
    Paragraph 4 requires Parties that have regulatory and 
assessment schemes for chemicals currently in use to take into 
consideration, ``where appropriate,'' Annex D criteria when 
assessing such pesticides or chemicals. (Annex D sets out 
criteria for listing a new POPs chemical, which consist of 
persistence, bioaccumulation, potential for long-range 
environmental, transport, and toxicity.) The United States is 
already fulfilling this requirement under existing programs and 
EPA may under its current authorities expand the extent to 
which it takes such factors into account when assessing 
existing chemicals or pesticides.
    Paragraph 5 provides that the control measures on 
production, use, and import and export set out in paragraphs 1 
and 2 do not apply to chemicals used for lab-scale research or 
as a reference standard.
    Paragraph 6 requires any Party that takes a specific 
exemption under Annexes A or B, or uses a chemical under an 
allowable purpose under Annex B, to ``take appropriate 
measures'' to prevent or minimize human exposure and release 
into the environment of that POP during its production and use. 
The United States does not intend to seek a specific exemption 
orutilize an allowable purpose for any of the currently listed 

               article 4--register of specific exemptions

    As noted above, any State may, upon becoming a Party and by 
notification to the Secretariat, register for one or more types 
of specific exemptions listed in Annex A or B. The purpose of 
such exemptions is to allow individual countries to take 
specific exemptions according to particular needs that might 
otherwise prevent them from joining the Convention, without the 
need for more categorical differential of obligations among 
Parties. The United States does not anticipate the need to 
submit any registrations for specific exemptions for the 
substances currently in the POPs Convention.
    Article 4 establishes a Register to identify Parties that 
have taken such specific exemptions. It also specifies the 
process for new registrations, and for their withdrawal and 
termination. Importantly, it also provides that all 
registrations will be subject to a review process, the details 
of which will be developed at the first meeting of the 
Conference of the Parties (``COP''). Unless an earlier date is 
indicated in the Register by a Party, or an extension is 
granted by the COP, registrations of specific exemptions shall 
expire five years after the date of entry into force of the 
obligation with respect to a particular chemical.
    Paragraph 1 specifies that these procedures do not apply to 
provisions in Annex A or Annex B that may be exercised by all 
Parties. This includes, for example, provisions regarding use 
of PCBs in Part I and Part II of Annex A, provisions regarding 
chemicals that occur in articles manufactured or already in 
use, and provisions that allow Parties to use a chemical as a 
closed-system, site-limited intermediate in the production of 
other chemicals. The Article also does not apply to 
``acceptable purposes'' identified in Annex B (at present 
limited to DDT).
    Paragraph 9 is an important ``sunset'' provision, providing 
that once there are no longer any Parties registered for a 
particular specific exemption, no new registrations for that 
exemption may be made.

article 5--measures to reduce or eliminate releases from unintentional 

    Article 5 contains obligations with respect to releases of 
chemicals listed in Annex C, and includes a goal of 
``continuing minimization and, where feasible, ultimate 
elimination.'' This is consistent with existing U.S. law under 
the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7401 et seq., and the Clean 
Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq. With respect to the term 
``feasible,'' negotiators agreed that this term included both 
technical and economic considerations.
    Paragraph (a) requires development by each Party of an 
action plan addressing releases of Annex C chemicals. The plan 
must include, among other things, development of source 
inventories and release estimates. The United States has 
existing authority to develop such inventories under the Clean 
Air Act, which is routinely used for developing inventories and 
release estimates of the kind described in this paragraph, and 
under the Clean Water Act with respect to releases of the 
pollutants to waters of the United States.
    Paragraph (b) requires each Party to promote measures to 
achieve meaningful reduction in POPs releases or in elimination 
of sources of POPs releases. The United States will implement 
this obligation through the Pollution Prevention Act, 42 U.S.C. 
Sec. 13101 et seq., which already requires EPA to establish a 
source reduction program and engage in other activities that 
promote reduction of releases.
    Paragraph (c) requires each Party to promote the use of 
substitute or modified materials, products and processes to 
prevent formation and release of Annex C chemicals. The United 
States will implement this obligation through the Pollution 
Prevention Act, which currently authorizes the promotion of 
reduction of sources of POPs releases through ``technology 
modifications, process or procedure modifications, 
reformulation or redesign of products, substitution of raw 
materials,'' as wellas through other authorities already 
provided in the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act.
    Paragraph (d) requires each Party to require the use of 
best available techniques (``BAT'') for new sources it 
identifies as warranting such action in its action plan, and in 
any case for new sources in the categories listed in Part II of 
Annex C (for example, municipal waste combustors), no later 
than four years after entry into force of the Convention for 
that Party. The United States already has sufficient authority 
under the Clean Air Act, with respect to emissions to air, and 
under the Clean Water Act, with respect to discharges to water, 
to implement these obligations. In most cases, moreover, the 
United States has regulations already in place for these source 
categories that will fully implement the BAT requirement.
    Paragraph (e) applies an obligation ``to promote'' the use 
of BAT on existing sources in the categories listed in Part II, 
as well as to such other categories of new and existing sources 
to the extent that a Party identifies the need for action 
regrading these sources as part of this action plan. Those 
additional categories may include categories listed in Part III 
if the United States considers them appropriate for inclusion. 
The United States already has sufficient existing statutory 
authority with respect to all of the required source categories 
(i.e., those listed in Part II), as well as most of the 
additional source categories under Part III, under the Clean 
Air Act and Clean Water Act.
    Paragraph (f) provides definitions of the terms ``best 
available techniques,'' ``best environmental practices'' and 
``new source.'' These definitions are consistent with U.S. law. 
Paragraph (g) allows Parties to use ``release limit values'' or 
``performance standards'' in place of best available 
techniques. This paragraph provides an alternative means to 
satisfy the requirements under paragraphs (d), (e) and (f).

article 6--measures to reduce or eliminate releases from stockpiles and 

    Article 6, which contains obligations regarding the 
treatment of POPs wastes, generally requires that Parties take 
certain specified measures to ensure that such wastes are 
managed in a manner protective of human health and the 
environment. The United States has sufficient existing 
authority under FIFRA, TSCA, the Comprehensive Environmental 
Responsibility, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 
Sec. 9601 et seq., and the Resource Conservation and Recovery 
Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 6901 et seq., (``RCRA'') to implement 
almost all of the obligations in Article 6.
    Paragraph 1(a) requires each Party to develop ``appropriate 
strategies'' for identifying both stockpiles containing 
chemicals in Annexes A or B, and also products and articles in 
use, and wastes, containing chemicals in Annexes A, B or C. To 
the extent that stockpiles containing chemicals in Annexes A or 
B exist in the United States, the United States is already 
implementing strategies to identify them through existing 
policy programs (for example, the ``Clean Sweeps'' program). 
The United States can also implement this obligation through 
authority under FIFRA section 6(g) and TSCA section 8(a), which 
provide authority to require certain persons to notify EPA of 
their possession and respective amounts of certain cancelled 
pesticides and other chemicals.
    Paragraph 1(b) requires each Party to identify ``to the 
extent practicable'' and ``on the basis of the strategies 
referred to in paragraph 1(a),'' stockpiles containing 
chemicals listed in either Annex A or B. The United states will 
implement this obligation using the authorities noted above.
    Paragraph 1(c) requires the appropriate management of 
stockpiles in a safe, efficient and environmentally sound 
manner. Existing U.S. laws, notably FIFRA section 19(a) and 
TSCA section 6, provide sufficient authority for the United 
States to implement this obligation through labeling and other 
means to ensure that stockpiles of pesticides and industrial 
chemicals listed in Annex A or B are handled, transported, and 
stored in an environmentally sound manner. This paragraph also 
provides that stockpiles, once they are no longer permitted to 
be used orexported in accordance with other provisions of the 
Convention, shall be deemed to be waste subject to paragraph (1)(d).
    Paragraph 1(d)(i) requires each Party to take appropriate 
measures for the treatment of wastes containing or contaminated 
with a chemical listed in Annex A, B or C. It requires that 
such POPs wastes be handled, collected, transported and stored 
in an environmentally sound manner. The United States will 
implement these obligations through existing waste disposal 
requirements in place under RCRA and TSCA.
    Paragraph 1(d)(ii) requires each Party to take appropriate 
measures so that POPs wastes are treated using destruction or 
irreversible transformation, or otherwise disposed of in an 
environmentally sound manner when destruction or irreversible 
transformation does not represent the environmentally 
preferable option or the POPs content is low. The United States 
will implement these obligations through existing waste 
disposal requirements in place under RCRA and TSCA.
    Paragraph 1(d)(iii) requires that POPs wastes must not be 
permitted to be subject to operations that may lead to the 
recycling, recovery or alternative use of the POPs content. The 
United States is not aware of any existing operations involving 
the recycling or recovery of POPs in the United States. There 
is nothing in current U.S. law, however, that clearly 
authorizes the regulation of POPs wastes in accordance with 
this obligation. To guarantee that the United States will be 
able to implement effectively this obligation, additional 
legislative authority will be sought to address recycling and 
recovery of POPs chemicals under FIFRA and TSCA authorities.
    Paragraph 1(d)(iv) requires that POPs wastes must not be 
exported or imported without taking into account relevant 
international standards. The United States already has in place 
requirements that will fulfill this obligation. For example, 
EPA has established requirements under RCRA for the export 
(including transport) of hazardous wastes such that exporters 
and transporters must comply with requirements of international 
agreements between the United States and receiving countries.
    Paragraph 1(e) requires each Party to endeavor to develop 
appropriate strategies for identifying sites contaminated by 
chemicals listed in Annex A, B or C. It does not require 
remediation of sites, but requires that, if undertaken, it be 
performed in an environmentally sound manner. The United States 
already has existing authority under RCRA and CERCLA to develop 
appropriate strategies for identifying sites contaminated by 
chemicals listed in these annexes, and to ensure that necessary 
remediation will be performed in an environmentally sound 
    Paragraph 2 directs the COP to cooperate with the 
appropriate bodies of the Basel Convention on the Control of 
Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal 
to develop certain guidance relating to the handling of POPs 
waste. Paragraph 2(c) calls on the COP to work to establish, in 
cooperation with the Basel COP, ``as appropriate,'' the 
concentration levels of the chemicals listed in Annexes A, B 
and C in order to define the low POP content referred to in 
paragraph 1(d). The criteria of what constitutes ``low'' POP 
content is an important factor in determining whether ``other 
disposal'' is permitted under paragraph 1(d). The United States 
does not interpret paragraph 2(c), however, as giving a mandate 
to the COP to set a definition of the term ``low'' that would 
be binding on Parties through paragraph 1(d): indeed, paragraph 
1(d) makes it clear that meaning of ``low'' is to be determined 
``taking into account international rules, standards and 
guidelines, including those that may be developed pursuant to 
paragraph 2. * * * '' In order to clarify and emphasize this 
view, it is recommended that the following understanding be 
included in the U.S. instrument of ratification:

          It is the understanding of the United States of 
        America that any work completed by the Conference of 
        the Parties under paragraph 2(c) of Article 6 would not 
        be considered binding on Parties, but rather would 
        constitute non-binding guidance on the meaning of the 
        term ``low'' that Parties would take into account in 
        accordance with paragraph 1(d) of Article 6.

                    article 7--implementation plans

    The Article calls upon Parties to develop and endeavor to 
implement a plan to implement its obligations under the 
Convention, and contains provisions regarding the 
transmittal,review and update of such plans. Plans are required to be 
submitted within two years of entry into force of the Convention for 
that Party. It also states that Parties shall, wherever appropriate, 
cooperate directly or through global, regional and subregional 
organizations, and consult with their national stakeholders to 
facilitate the development, implementation and updating of the 
implementation plans.

         article 8--listing of chemicals in annexes a, b and c

    As noted above, the Convention is intended to be a dynamic 
instrument, under which additional chemicals that meet certain 
key criteria may be added to the regime in the future. Article 
8, together with Annexes D, E and F and Article 22 (on 
amendments to annexes), set out the procedure by which those 
additional chemicals will be considered and added.
    Paragraphs 1 and 2 set out the procedure for proposing the 
addition of a new chemical and the Secretariat's initial 
information screening process. Paragraphs 3 and 4 set forth the 
process by which the Persistent Organic Pollutant Review 
Committee (the Committee) reviews whether the proposal 
satisfies the screening criteria in Annex D. The criteria are: 
persistence, bioaccumulation, toxicity, long-range transport, 
and evidence of adverse effects. The Committee shall review and 
apply the proposal ``in a flexible and transparent way, taking 
all information provided into account in an integrative and 
balanced manner.'' If the Committee believes that the screening 
criteria are satisfied, it makes the proposal available and 
invites Parties and observers to submit information specified 
in Annex E (concerning risk). If not, the Committee sets the 
proposal aside.
    Paragraph 5 allows any Party to resubmit a proposal that 
the Committee has set aside under paragraph 4. If the Committee 
sets it aside again, the Party may appeal that decision to the 
COP. The COP may then decide, ``based on the screening criteria 
in Annex D'' and taking other information into account, that 
the proposal shall proceed. This formulation was sought by the 
United States in order to tie the COP's decision to the 
scientific criteria.
    Paragraph 6 provides for a further review of proposals that 
proceed beyond the screening stage. The Committee prepares a 
draft risk profile in accordance with Annex E, makes that draft 
available and receives comments on it, and then completes the 
risk profile.
    Paragraph 7 sets out a key decision point for the 
Committee: on the basis of the risk profile, the Committee must 
decide whether ``the chemical is likely as a result of its 
long-range environmental transport to lead to significant 
adverse human health and/or environmental effects such that 
global action is warranted.'' If the Committee so decides, the 
proposal shall proceed to the next stage: a risk management 
review in accordance with Annex F, including an evaluation of 
the possible associated control measures for the chemical, as 
well as costs and alternatives.
    If the Committee decides that the chemical does not meet 
this standard, the proposal is set aside. The text provides 
that ``[l]ack of full scientific certainty shall not prevent 
the proposal from proceeding.'' This provision merely allows 
the Committee to conclude that ``global action is warranted'' 
such that the proposal should proceed to the risk management 
review, even where it lacks ``full'' scientific certainty. It 
does not allow the Committee to move forward where it lacks any 
scientific certainty; it must still determine that the chemical 
is ``likely as a result of its long-range environmental 
transport to lead to significant adverse human health and/or 
environmental effects.'' This formulation is consistent with 
risk-based decision-making by chemical regulators under 
existing U.S. law.
    Paragraph 8 provides an appeal process for Parties similar 
to that in paragraph 5. If, following this process, the 
Committee sets the proposal aside once again, the Party may 
appeal the decision to the COP, which ``based on the risk 
profile'' may decide the proposal shall proceed to a risk 
management review.
    Paragraph 9 provides that the Committee shall, ``based on 
the risk profile * * * and the risk management evaluation,'' 
make a recommendation whether the chemical should be listed 
inAnnexes A, B and/or C. In the end, the COP, ``taking the account of 
the recommendations of the Committee, including any scientific 
uncertainly, shall decide, in a precautionary manner'' whether to list 
the chemical and associated control measures. This is consistent with 
U.S. approaches to precaution in chemicals regulation, which provide 
for risk management decisions even when there is lack of full 
scientific certainty.


    Article 9 requires Parties to ``facilitate or undertake'' 
the exchange of information relevant to the reduction or 
elimination of production, use, and release of POPs and on 
alternatives to POPs. Paragraph 5 provides further that 
information on the health and safety of humans and the 
environment is not confidential, but that Parties that exchange 
other information shall protect any confidential information as 
mutually agreed. Because this Article does not require the 
exchange of any information, it does not conflict with U.S. law 
regarding the protection of confidential business information 


    Article 19 contains a number of obligations to promote and 
facilitate the provision of available POPs-related information 
to the public. Most of these provisions are obligations that 
the United States already is implementing through various 
public awareness campaigns and programs.
    Paragraph 2 requires each Party ``within its capabilities'' 
to ensure that the public has access to ``the public 
information'' referred to in paragraph 1. Paragraph 1 concerns 
``available information persistent organic pollutions.'' 
Although release of all available information on POPs could 
theoretically require release of certain health and safety 
information that would be protected as CBI under U.S. law, the 
obligation in paragraph 2 applies only to ``the public 
information referred to in paragraph 1.'' (emphasis added) 
Thus, this requirement excludes CBI data, which is not public.
    Paragraph 5 requires Parties to give sympathetic 
consideration to developing mechanisms for the collection and 
dissemination of information on estimates of annual quantities 
of POPs released or disposed. EPA, with its Toxic Release 
Inventory (TRI) program, requires release and disposal 
reporting on most of the Annex A, B and C chemicals.


    Article 11 requires the Parties collectively, at the 
national and international level, to encourage or undertake 
``appropriate research, development, monitoring and cooperation 
pertaining to'' POPs. The United States, through existing 
research programs and international cooperation programs, is 
already undertaking or providing support for POPs research, 
cooperation and monitoring.

                    ARTICLE 12--TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

    Article 12 concerns the provision of technical assistance 
to developing country Parties and Parties with economies in 
transition to help them implement their obligations under the 
Convention. Paragraph 3 specifies that the technical assistance 
to be provided, ``as appropriate and as mutually agreed,'' by 
developed country Parties shall include assistance for 
capacity-building related to implementation of the obligations 
under the Convention. This language gives developed country 
Parties considerable flexibility to decide the scope of their 
collective technical assistance obligation. Paragraph 5 
obligates the Parties collectively to establish 
``arrangements,'' including centers for capacity-building and 
transfer of technology.
    The United States will implement its obligations under this 
article through a range of ongoing bilateral and multilateral 
aid and assistance programs, including, for example, programs 
administered by USAID, EPA and other agencies, as well as 
through contributions to the Global Environment Facility (GEF) 
and other multilateral organizations. Such programs and 
contributions will require appropriations.


    This article, and paragraph 2 in particular, reflect the 
commitment of developed country Parties collectively to provide 
financial resources to assist developing country Parties to 
meet their commitments under the Convention. This obligation is 
qualified in significant respects. Developed country Parties as 
a collective are to provide ``new and additional'' financial 
resources to meet the agreed full incremental costs of 
implementing measures by developing country Parties which 
fulfill their obligations under the Convention. Both the costs 
and the implementing measures must be agreed between the 
recipient Party and an entity participating in the mechanism 
established in paragraph 6. The mechanism in paragraph 6 will 
consist of, at least for an interim period, the GEF. Paragraph 
6 also reiterates the requirement of paragraph 2 that 
contributions to the mechanism be ``additional'' to other 
financial transfers.
    Paragraph 7 provides that the COP shall provide guidance to 
the mechanism regarding policies for access to financial 
resources, promotion of multiple-source funding, and modalities 
for determining the amount of funding necessary and available 
to implement the Convention, and for providing Parties with 
assistance for needs assessment.
    The Convention does not create either a new fund or mandate 
the funding of recurrent and non-incremental costs, and does 
not establish new or specific assessments. The United States 
will implement this obligation through its contributions to the 
GEF and other multilateral, regional and bilateral entities 
that provide financial assistance. Such contributions will 
require an appropriation.


    Article 14 provides that the GEF shall be the principal 
entity entrusted with the operations of the Article 13 
financial mechanism on an interim basis. It or another entity 
could have this role permanently by a decision of the COP.

                         ARTICLE 15--REPORTING

    Article 15 requires generally that each Party report on 
measures it has taken to implement the provisions of this 
Convention, as well as their effectiveness. It requires 
reporting of certain statistical data, or reasonable estimates 
thereof, on production and trade.


    This article provides for a periodic evaluation by the COP 
of the Convention's effectiveness, based on monitoring 
arrangements to be initiated at the first COP. The monitoring 
arrangements are intended to give the COP comparable monitoring 
data on the presence and transport of the listed POPs, and 
should use existing monitoring programs and mechanisms to the 
extent possible. The United States is already participating in 
several global monitoring and research initiatives that could 
provide monitoring data to be used under Article 16.

                       ARTICLE 17--NON-COMPLIANCE

    Article 17 instructs the COP ``as soon as practicable'' to 
establish mechanisms and procedures for determining non-
compliance with the Convention's obligations and for the 
treatment of Parties found to be in non-compliance. Article 17 
is typical of non-compliance provisions contained in several 
multilateral environmental agreements to which the United 
States is a Party.


    This article provides that the Parties shall settle 
disputes through negotiation or other peaceful means. 
Consistent with many recent environmental agreements, this 
article also provides for mandatory recourse, at the request of 
one party to a dispute, to non-binding conciliation. Procedures 
for this non-binding process will be elaborated in an annex to 
be adopted by the COP. In addition, paragraph 2 provides that a 
Party may declare with respect to Parties that have made 
similar declarations that it is prepared to submit to 
compulsory dispute settlement by arbitration or before the 
International Court of Justice.Consistent with prior practice, 
it is recommended that the United States not make such a declaration.


    Article 19 establishes a COP, consistent with the standard 
practice in multilateral environmental agreements. Paragraph 4 
instructs the COP to adopt rules of procedure and financial 
rules for itself and for any subsidiary bodies by consensus. 
Paragraph 6 instructs the COP to establish a subsidiary body at 
its first meeting, the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review 
Committee, to perform the specific functions conferred upon the 
committee under the Convention. It provides that the Committee 
shall make every effort to adopt its recommendations by 
consensus, but at a last resort shall adopt its recommendations 
by a two-thirds majority vote.

                        ARTICLE 20--SECRETARIAT

    Article 20 establishes the Secretariat, delineates its 
functions, and specifies that the functions of the Secretariat 
are to be performed by the Executive Director of UNEP unless 
the COP decides otherwise.


    Article 21 contains provisions that are common to several 
international environmental agreements to which the United 
States is a party. Paragraph 1 states that any Party may 
propose amendments to the Convention. Paragraph 2 provides that 
amendments shall be adopted at a meeting of the COP provided 
that they have been circulated to all parties at least six 
months in advance of the meeting.
    Paragraph 3 requires that Parties must endeavor to reach 
agreement on the proposed amendment by consensus. When 
consensus cannot be reached, it requires a vote to adopt by a 
three-fourths majority of the Parties present and voting. 
Paragraph 4 requires amendments to be communicated to the 
Depositary. Paragraph 5 provides that an amendment shall enter 
into force for those Parties that have accepted it, ninety days 
after it has been accepted by at least three-fourths of the 
Parties. Thereafter, it enters into force for any other Party 
ninety days after that Party deposits its instrument of 
ratification, acceptance or approval of the amendment.


    Article 22 covers the process for amending the Convention's 
annexes and adding new annexes. As noted above, it is an 
important element of the process for adding new POPs chemicals 
to the Convention. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 22 provide 
that the annexes form an integral part of the Convention and 
restrict any additional annexes to ``procedural, scientific, 
technical or administrative matters.''
    Paragraph 3 sets out the procedure for adding additional 
annexes to the Convention. It provides that the procedure for 
proposal and adoption of such annexes shall be identical to 
that for adoption of amendments to the Convention (i.e., all 
efforts at consensus, or at a minimum three-fourths majority to 
adopt an additional annex). However, new annexes will enter 
into force through an ``opt-out'' procedure: once adopted, the 
annex will bind all Parties one year after adoption, except for 
those Parties that have submitted, during that year, a 
notification of non-acceptance. As noted below, however, 
paragraph 6 provides that, if the adoption of a new annex is 
linked to an amendment of the Convention, the annex will enter 
into force when the related amendment enters into force.
    Paragraph 4 sets forth a special procedure for the 
proposal, adoption and entry into force of amendments to 
Annexes A, B, or C; these are the annexes that list the 
chemicals covered by the convention and set out the related 
control obligations. (Note: additional requirements for 
proposing amendments to list a new chemical in these Annexes 
are found in Article 8.) These amendments are to be proposed 
and adopted in the same manner as adding a new annex (i.e., 
requiring all efforts to achieve consensus or, at a minimum, a 
three-fourths majority to adopt the amendment). Once they are 
adopted, amendments to add new chemicals will enter into force 
for all Parties one year later, except in two cases:
          (1) where, as with new annexes, a Party has notified 
        the depositary within that one-year period that it does 
        not accept the amendment (i.e., invokes an ``opt-out'' 
        procedure); or
          (2) where a Party has made a declaration, at the time 
        it deposits its instrument of ratification in 
        accordance with Article 25(4), that any amendment to 
        Annexes A, B or C shall enter into force for it only 
        upon its affirmative acceptance of that new obligation 
        (i.e., it invokes a Party-specific ``opt-in'' 
    The second alternative above, which was sought by the 
United States, creates an optional Party-specific ``opt-in'' 
approach for the addition of new chemicals. In the absence of 
its express consent, a Party that has made such a declaration 
is not bound by any new listing.
    Paragraph 5 sets forth a different procedure for the 
proposal, adoption, and entry into force of amendments to 
Annexes D, E and F. These are the annexes that set out the 
criteria and information requirements governing the process for 
listing new chemicals. These criteria must apply equally to all 
Parties: the Committee could not properly carry out its 
responsibilities, thus jeopardizing the effectiveness of the 
Convention, if different Parties had agreed to different 
listing criteria. Accordingly, more traditional amendment 
procedures that allow parties to accept or reject particular 
amendments would not work in these cases. Therefore, the 
Convention provides for amendment of these annexes only by 
consensus. Once consensus is achieved, however, the amendment 
enters into force for all Parties. Importantly, the requirement 
for consensus means that a change in the criteria annexes, 
which contain no direct obligations or Parties but could affect 
the ultimate scope of the Convention, could not be achieved 
over the objection of the United States, if it became a Party.
    Paragraph 6 provides that, if an additional annex or 
amendment to an annex is related to an amendment to the 
Convention, it only enters into force when the corresponding 
amendment to the Convention enters into force. An amendment to 
an annex that is linked to an amendment to the Convention would 
therefore not enter into force until the procedures under 
Article 21 had been completed.

                     ARTICLES 23-30 (FINAL CLAUSES)

    Articles 23 through 30 are final clauses that are routinely 
included in conventions negotiated under the auspices of the 
United Nations. Article 23 provides that each party shall have 
one vote, permits regional economic integration organizations 
(``REIOs'') to exercise the number of votes equal to the number 
of their member states that are Parties to the Convention, and 
precludes a REIO from exercising its right to vote if any of 
its members states exercises their right to vote.
    Article 24 provides that the Convention is open for 
signature by all States until May 22, 2002. As noted above, 
Article 25 provides that any Party may declare when it submits 
its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or 
accession that any amendments to Annexes A, B or C shall only 
enter into force for it upon an affirmative indication of its 
consent to be bound. Article 25 also provides that REIOs and 
their member states are not entitled to exercise rights under 
the Convention concurrently, and that in becoming Party to the 
Convention, a REIO must declare the extent of its competence in 
respect of matters governed by the Convention.
    Article 26 provides that the Convention shall enter into 
force on the ninetieth day after the deposit of the fiftieth 
instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. 
Instruments deposited by a REIO are not counted for purposes of 
bringing the Convention into force.
    Article 27 states that no reservations may be made to the 
Convention. The United States did not endorse this provision in 
the negotiations, but was the only delegation to express 
concerns about this language.

                          ANNEX A--ELIMINATION

    Part I of Annex A lists the chemicals that Parties are 
required to control under Article 3(1). As discussed above 
under Article 4, the Annex also sets out certain ``specific 
exemptions,''which detail the type of production and use that a 
country may continue if it has registered for such exemption in 
accordance with Article 4.
    Part I also contains four ``notes,'' three of which serve, 
in effect, as exemptions to certain obligations in the 
Convention. Note (i) states that quantities of a chemical 
occurring as unintentional or trace contaminants in products 
and articles are not considered to be listed in the Annex. This 
clarification will help ensure that the convention is 
reasonably capable of being implemented.
    Note (ii) allows continued use, including export and 
import, of quantities of POPs chemicals that are constituents 
of articles manufactured or already in use before the entry 
into force of the relevant obligation so long as a Party 
notifies the Secretariat that a particular type of article 
remains in use within that Party. The note requires the 
Secretariat to make such notification available to the public. 
The United States expects to make use of this exemption with 
respect to a number of articles, such as treated wood.
    Note (iii) allows a Party, upon notification to the 
Secretariat, to continue to produce and use specified Annex A 
or B chemicals (for example, hexachlorobenzene or ``HCB'') as 
closed-system, site-limited intermediates. (Intermediates are 
chemicals that are used in the production of other chemicals.) 
HCB is currently used in the United States as an intermediate. 
The United States may, therefore, choose to rely on Note (iii) 
of Annex A to notify the Secretariat that it will produce and 
use HCB as an intermediate in accordance with the provisions of 
that Note. Such notification would not be required until the 
Convention enters into force for the United States. The 
exemption is renewable upon notification every 10 years, 
although the COP may decide not to renew it.
    Note (iv) makes it clear that the specific exemptions 
listed in Part A may only be exercised by countries that have 
registered for such exemptions in accordance with Article 4, 
with one exception: the specific exemption for use of 
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in articles in use under Part 
II (discussed below) may be exercised by all Parties, without 
the need for a registration under Article 4.
    Part II of Annex A contains obligations related to the use 
of PCBs in equipment. Paragraph (a) sets out certain 
obligations with respect to the identification, labeling and 
removal from use equipment containing specified levels of PCBs. 
It also references a target date of 2025, subject to review by 
the COP, for the phase-out of such equipment that should guide 
Parties in implementing their obligations under this provision. 
The United States has already taken strict measures to regulate 
PCBs and can implement this provision under existing 
    The remaining sections of Part II obligate each Party to 
promote certain measures designed to reduce the risk from PCBs 
in equipment; prohibit export of PCBs except for the purpose of 
environmentally sound waste management; prohibit recovery for 
purposes of reuse of certain PCB liquids above 0.005 percent; 
and ``make determined efforts'' to ensure that all liquid PCBs 
and PCB equipment is disposed of in accordance with Article 6 
by 2028. Existing statutory authority allows the United States 
to implement each of these obligations, nearly all of which are 
currently addressed under existing PCB regulations. Only U.S. 
regulations that currently allow the export of PCB equipment 
will require revision to conform them to these obligations.

                          ANNEX B--RESTRICTION

    Part I of Annex B will list those chemicals for which 
production and use are restricted under Article 3, paragraph 
1(b). Currently, the only chemical on the list is DDT. Annex B 
restricts DDT production and use to disease vector control, in 
recognition of its special value in fighting the spread of 
malaria, which claims over one million lives worldwide each 
year. Annex B also allows Parties to take specific exemptions 
for DDT production and use as an intermediate in the production 
of dicofol, a pesticide. DDT is not currently registered for 
use in the United States for disease vector control, nor is it 
produced in the United States. As noted above, however, DDT 
could potentially be legally produced or imported for use as an 
industrial chemical under certaincircumstances. Legislation 
will be sought to close this potential gap.
    Annex B also contains four ``notes.'' These are nearly 
identical to the notes described under Annex A, with certain 
conforming changes. Those changes reflect the fact that Annex 
B, as a ``restriction annex'' contains two types of controls: 
(a) ``acceptable purposes,'' which list the production and use 
restrictions that are available to all Parties; and (b) 
specific exemptions, which allow additional exemptions for 
Parties that register for the specified purposes.
    Part II of Annex B prescribes the restricted terms under 
which a Party may produce and use DDT for disease vector 
control. It creates a separate register for Parties that 
produce and use DDT, specifies certain reporting obligations 
for such Parties, and includes provisions aimed at the 
development and use of alternatives to DDT.

                   annex c--unintentional production

    Annex C lists the POPs chemicals that occur as 
unintentionally produced byproducts, which are subject to the 
control measures set out in Article 5. The listed byproduct 
POPs are: dioxins, furans, hexachlorobenzene, and PCB. Annex C 
also sets out the two types of source categories referred to in 
Article 5: source categories that have a potential for 
comparatively high formation and release of these chemicals, 
and other source categories from which they may be 
unintentionally released. Annex C also provides general 
guidance to Parties on best available techniques and best 
environmental practices for preventing or reducing releases of 
the listed POPs byproducts. As provided in Article 5, this 
general guidance will be elaborated in the future in guidelines 
to be adopted by the COP.


    Annex D sets out information requirements and screening 
criteria that each proposal for listing a new POPs chemical 
must satisfy. The proposing Party must submit information to 
identify the chemical, information relevant to the screening 
criteria set out in subparagraphs (b) through (e), a statement 
of the reasons for concern and, to the extent possible, 
information relating to risk management of the chemical. 
Subparagraph (b) requires evidence of persistence. Subparagraph 
(c) requires evidence of bioaccumulation. Subparagraphs (d) and 
(e) require evidence of the chemical's potential for long-range 
transport and toxicity, respectively. The numerical criteria 
for persistence and bioaccumulation in the Convention are 
consistent with the criteria applied under existing law and 
policy in the United States.
    Annexes E and F provide the information requirements that 
the Persistent Organic Pollutant Review Committee considers in 
conducting the risk profile and risk management evaluation, 
    Annexes D, E and F are consistent with the approach taken 
in existing U.S. pesticide and chemical regulations. 
Considerations for taking action under FIFRA and TSCA include 
risk, costs, benefits, and other societal factors. As a 
practical matter, therefore it is likely that any chemical that 
would be approved for listing under this international 
procedures would also be the subject of significant regulatory 
action within the United States.

Domestic implementation of the POPs Convention

    As noted above, the United States could implement nearly 
all Convention obligations under existing authorities. There 
are exceptions, however, where limited additional legislative 
authority, through changes to FIFRA and TSCA, will be sought to 
ensure the United States' ability to implement provisions of 
the Convention. These changes primarily concern the obligations 
in Article 3, which concerns measures to eliminate production 
and use of listed chemicals, as well as to control their import 
and export. In addition, statutory authority to prohibit any 
recycling of POPs substances will also be sought, in order to 
ensure effective U.S. compliance with paragraph 1(d)(iii) of 
Article 6. Other targeted changes may also be sought to ensure 
our ability to participate effectively in negotiations 
regardingproposed amendments to add chemicals, and to ensure 
that the United States is able to ratify such amendments in a timely 
manner, if it so chooses.


    To date, ninety-one states have signed the Convention; one 
state (Canada) has already ratified the Convention. Several 
states, including many members of the Organization for Economic 
Cooperation and Development, are expected to deposit 
instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval over the 
next year. Early U.S. ratification would provide valuable 
momentum to bring the Convention into force and would 
demonstrate the continued commitment of the United States to 
cooperation with the international community on chemicals 
management issues, including at the World Summit on Sustainable 
Development in Johannesburg in September 2002. It would also 
demonstrate continued U.S. leadership on safe management of 
hazardous chemicals, pesticides, and their wastes. Finally, it 
would ensure that the United States is a Party when the 
Convention enters into force, when many of the critical 
decisions relating to its implementation will be made. For 
example, only Parties will be able to designate experts to sit 
on the Persistent Organic Pollutant Review Committee, which 
will play a key role in considering the addition of new 
substances to the Convention annexes.
    I recommend that the Stockholm Convention on Persistent 
Organic Pollutants, with Annexes, be transmitted to the Senate 
for its advice and consent as soon as possible, subject to the 
understandings previously described.
    Respectfully submitted,
                                                   Colin L. Powell.