STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE AND THE MIDDLE EAST U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES July 31, 1986 One of the first U.S.-Soviet science and technology accords, the US-USSR Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Environmental Protection was signed by the two Heads of State on May 23, 1972, during the Moscow summit meeting of that year. It was extended for a second five-year term in May 1977. After a complete interagency review, the Reagan Administration approved its extension for a third five-year term beginning in May 1982. Interagency consideration of another five-year extension will take place this fall. In its present form, the US-USSR Environmental Agreement provides for cooperative activity in 38 specific projects among 11 general areas: air pollution, water pollution, pollution associated with agriculture, the urban environment, nature conservation, marine pollution, biological/genetic effects, climatic effects, earthquake prediction, arctic/subarctic ecosystems, and legal/ administrative measures. On the U.S. side, 10 different federal departments and agencies are involved in varying degrees, along with several universities and industrial associations. Overall coordination and communication responsibilities are vested in an executive secretariat located in the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of International Activities. The Soviet side of the Agreement is represented by some dozen ministries and state committees, plus an approximately equal number of Academy of Sciences institutes. The Soviet executive secretariat is located in the USSR State Committee for Hydrometeorology and Control of the Natural Environment, designated hereafter as Hydromet. By mutual agreement, official correspondence in both directions is passed through the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. Prior to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, a Joint Committee comprised of key representatives from each area of the Agreement met annually to review the previous year's accomplishments and to plan or ratify activities for the coming year. Since 1974, the Soviet Co-chairman of the Environmental Joint Committee has been Hydromet chairman, Academician Yuriy A. Izrael; the current U.S. Co-chairman is EPA Administrator Lee M. Thomas. After a six-year hiatus, the Joint Committee met last November in Moscow, on the eve of the Reagan-Gorbachev summit. Co-chaired by Administrator Thomas and Academician Izrael, the meeting produced a revised, trimmed down agenda for cooperation in 1986; eight dormant projects were dropped, four new ones added, and several existing projects were reformulated in line with current priorities and interests. The next meeting of the Joint Committee is tentatively scheduled for this coming November here in Washington. Though precise figures for the period 1972-76 are unavailable, one may estimate with confidence that well over 2000 Soviet and American scientists, engineers, and administrators have participated in exchange visits during the life of the Environmental Agreement. The number of exchange visitors for the period 197786 is presented below: After a pre-Afghanistan annual average of over 300 participants, Annual cost of environmental exchange activities with the USSR is difficult to assess, since each participating agency funds its own involvement without line-item appropriation. Apart from the time contributed by American personnel, costs are generally limited to travel expenses: international air fare for Americans visiting the USSR; accommodations, subsistence, in-country transportation, and interpreter fees for Soviets visiting the U.S. Occasionally, joint field research requires procurement and shipment of hardware and supplies as well. A reasonable estimate of average annual U.S. government expenditures for this program over the past several fiscal years would be $250,000-$300,000. FY87 expenditures will probably be higher ($400,000-$500,000) owing to several large bilateral meetings which the U.S. side is obliged to host in this period, as well as a modest overall increase in exchange activity under the Agreement. An assessment of the benefits accruing to the U.S. under this Agreement shows a generally positive trend, although various difficulties continue to limit the productivity of the program. A numher of unproductive or dormant projects were terminated at last November's Joint Committee meeting. Almost all of the 38 remaining projects are either productively active or have good short-term potential. In many cases, however, the two sides' interests in a particular project are not symmetrical. New projects can require several years of patient, intermittent contact before a mutually acceptable work plan is developed. Even then, progress is often disappointingly slow. Soviet performance under even very good projects tends to be episodic and uneven--a function less of inadequate scientific input than of the formidable bureaucratic controls imposed by Moscow in approving foreign travel or the transfer of data by Soviet scientists. Merely getting here from there-visiting Soviets are compelled to fly the USSR national airline, Aeroflot--can involve two or more reschedulings, with serious inconvenience to the American hosts. The substantive contributions of the Soviet side are constrained by other administrative difficulties as well. Though not recently a problem, many areas of the USSR are off limits to American scientists. Last minute issuance of Soviet visas, long delays in responding to correspondence, and postponement of Soviet delegation visits with little or no advance warning continue to challenge the enthusiasm of American participants. Confiscation of techni cal materials by Soviet customs officials is a persistent annoyance. And the unjustified black-listing of one key Interior Department employee has substantially reduced cooperation on problems of nature conservation, formerly one of the most active areas of the Agreement. Still, when Soviet and American colleagues do manage to overcome these obstacles and meet face-to-face, the result is almost always a productive, worthwhile exchange. Although the number of such visits each year has declined sharply since the late '70s, the productivity of many projects is higher than ever. What forms of benefit are realized under the Environmental Agreement? On the most basic level, the Agreement is a unique channel of direct access to the growing environmental research and policy community in the USSR. Years before the current trend toward greater openness in Soviet press discussions of domestic problems, the environment was an issue which tended to arouse a striking degree of |