30 ! 



1 



Senator Lieberman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ms. Browner. 

 Thank you for your statement and the good work that you have 



begun to do at EPA. , . , 



I want to continue, if I can, to talk a httle bit about what does or 

 does not go into the bill and to explain why I think this is an op- 

 portunity, as we elevate EPA, to make sure that we do not also lose 

 the opportunity to give it the structural strength that I think you 

 need and that the Administration wants to carry out some of its 



goals. 



Perhaps first I should take a moment to try to define this notion 

 of clean bill. I said earlier this is not a clean bill. This is certainly 

 an environmentally clean bill. I think what we are saying is that it 

 is not a legislatively clean bill. 



I am a cosponsor of the bill. I think it is a very good bill, but I 

 think it is important to note that it does do more than simply ele- 

 vate the agency to departmental status. And what it does, the more 

 that it does I think is well done. There is a reason for doing each of 

 the things. For instance, to create the Bureau of Environmental 

 Statistics. 



So what I am saying here is that while we are creating this new 

 department — and, of course, none of us want to create an obstacle 

 to its creation — isn't it also important to try to have its structure 

 reflect some of the substantive goals that the Administration and I 

 think the rest of us have for the department? 



I guess this is the distinction I would make: It seems to me that 

 it is one thing for somebody to try to add a provision here that 

 would affect takings of land or, to mention one that I might sub- 

 stantively support, to add a provision prohibiting forever the devel- 

 opment of oil drilling on the Alaskan wildlife area, those to me are 

 substantive, controversial environmental issues, quite apart from 

 structural improvements or creations in the department that help 

 the department carry out its function. 



That is why I have been working, for instance, with Senator Mi- 

 kulski on the idea of giving you the structural ability to carry out 

 the environmental technology policy that I know you support, or in 

 another sense, to taking the Small Business Office, which is tucked 

 away at this point in the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Busi- 

 ness Utilization, which I gather has the primary mission of guard- 

 ing the rights of small business in the procurement process and 

 really creating the kind of pollution prevention outreach office that 

 I think people want. 



The same is true — the Chairman of the Committee entering into 

 the dialogue with you about this whole question of how does the 

 new department truly integrate environmental policy throughout 

 the Government. Well, I think it was with that in mind that this 

 National Commission on the Environment proposed that we au- 

 thorize the Administration to create a national environmental 

 strategy, beyond just looking at the EPA laws here at the outset of 

 its new status. 



So I wanted to explain first, as a strong advocate of departmental 

 status, why I do think that these structural changes can help you 

 achieve the purposes that I know you have and not detract from 

 the potential to adopt the bill that we've got here, and I invite the 

 response to that, if you will. 



