[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 111 (Thursday, July 25, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1381-E1382]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          HELP EPA; SUPPORT PERFORMANCE-BASED METHODS APPROVAL

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. BILL BAKER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 25, 1996

  Mr. BAKER of California. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing, along 
with my colleague from California, Zoe Lofgren, a bill we hope will 
help move the EPA along faster in reforming the way in which new 
environmental monitoring technologies enter the marketplace. The EPA 
has expressed some interest in moving in a positive direction on this 
issue, but we are concerned that interest does not mean movement. Our 
bill attempts to lay the groundwork for a comprehensive reappraisal of 
EPA's methods approval process, and we fully expect to work closely 
with both EPA and the analytical instruments industry along the way.
  The House Committee on Science had an opportunity recently to hear 
from all interested parties on this issue. On June 20, we heard from 
Assistant Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation of the 
EPA, David Gardiner, who told our committee there is interest at the 
EPA in moving more toward a performance-based environmental methods 
approval process. This is indeed good news, as the current system of 
mandating specific analytical

[[Page E1382]]

instruments through regulation language is untenable to those who 
invent new technologies that could do the same job better or cheaper. 
Certainly it is in the best interest of the Federal Government to 
ensure that the best and cheapest new technologies are used to monitor 
environmental contamination, wherever it occurs. It is our hope that 
this bill will serve as the basis for common ground on this reform of 
the EPA approval process, and that we will be able to address the issue 
in more detail in the coming months.
  To be sure, there are many details yet to be worked out. This bill in 
no way represents the final word on how EPA should act. We know that 
further analysis may yield further ideas which will be considered 
through the normal committee process. But we intend, with this bill, to 
offer a starting point for discussion on this issue.
  We encourage those who agree with our intent to make the EPA a more 
technology friendly agency to join as cosponsors to this legislation. 
The results will be good for both the U.S. economy and the health of 
our collective environment.

                          ____________________