253 



Making environmental protection integral to economic growth depends, to an im- 

 portant extent, on our mitiative in developing and using technologies that will both 

 ameliorate existmg pollution problems and prevent further deterioration of this na- 

 tion s and the world s environment. 



As we develop the technologies needed to address the world's environmental prob- 

 lems, we will also stimulate greater economic growth in this country. Foreign na- 

 tions will come to the United States to provide technical assistance to implement 

 environmental policies or clean up current environmental trouble spots. When 

 people in Eastern Europe want to make their air cleaner or rivers less polluted or 

 when people in sub-Sahara Africa want information on sustainable agricultural de- 

 velopment or deforestation, they should be able to look to the United States to ad- 

 dress their concerns. A clean environment is not only necessary, it is good business. 



The United States cannot afford to lag in the development of environmental tech- 

 nologies. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has 

 reported that 800,000 people in the U.S. are currently employed in environmental 

 industries — from managing waste to designing more energy efficient consumer prod- 

 ucts. OECD estimates that the world market for environmental technologies will 

 grow from the current $200 billion to $300 billion a year by the year 2000. Both 

 Germany and Japan have recognized the potential economic benefit and growth of 

 environmental industries. Those countries are already investing in environmental 

 research and development — as we must continue to do. 



In addition to elevating EPA, S. 171 establishes a Bureau of Environmental Statis- 

 tics within the EPA, a Presidential Commission on improving environmental protec- 

 tion, and also urges the convening of an international meeting on energy efficiency 

 and renewable resources. These provisions will improve EPA's performance in im- 

 portant areas and we support them. 



In closing, the quality of life of our citizens and the strength of our economy 

 depend on a healthy environment. Our survival, and that of our children, requires 

 that we address global environment concerns. Creation of a Department of the Envi- 

 ronment will demonstrate our nation's commitment to meeting environmental chal- 

 lenges in this country and around the world. A Department of the Environment is 

 long past due ifvre are to get the job done. 



I thank you for the opportunity to present our views on this important matter, 

 and am pleased to answer any questions the Committee may have. 



Prepared Statement of Stephen J. Gage 



My name is Stephen J. Gage. I am president of the Cleveland Advanced Manufac- 

 turing Program (CAMP) in Cleveland, Ohio. From 1974 to 1980, I was employed by 

 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency here in Washington, D.C. During the 

 Carter Administration, I served as the Assistant Administrator for Research and 

 Development under Administrator Douglas M. Costle. Before joining CAMP, I ran 

 the State of Indiana's seed capital investment program. Recently I served on a Car- 

 negie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government task force which re- 

 viewed the organization of Federal environmental research and development. 



I am pleased to have the opportunity today to comment on S. 171 and on several 

 related matters including a recent report from the Carnegie Commission Task Force 

 and the Federal role in developing environmental control technology. 



Importance of S. 171 



First, Mr. Chairman, I would like to add my support to your efforts to elevate the 

 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to cabinet status. Each passing year makes 

 it more essential to have a Secretary of the Environment in the President's Cabinet. 

 This is an idea whose time arrived during the past few years as we finally awak- 

 ened to realize that the Earth's life support systems are indeed fragile and threat- 

 ened. S. 171 should be passed as soon as possible. 



I understand that politics is the "art of the possible," that we should move delib- 

 erately. I hope, though, that elevation of EPA to cabinet status is just the first step 

 of a general reorganization of environmental programs within the Federal Govern- 

 ment. If a Department of the Environment is to serve the best interests of Ameri- 

 cans, it must be driven by more than just regulations. Otherwise we should leave it 

 as an independent regulatory agency. 



A Department of the Environment, I am confident, can meet our regulatory 

 needs. The Food and Drug Administration and the Occupational Safety and Health 



