44 



So the question is which is a more important end point, the tox- 

 icity of the materials in the superconductor, or the potential sav- 

 ings in energy consumption with concomitant effects on global cli- 

 mate change. 



We don't have any way of answering that. Establishing these pri- 

 orities is a social decision, and it should be a consensus decision 

 of society, as represented by government. As yet, we don't have any 

 such prioritization, and that makes it very difficult because you 

 don't know what the end point of your choice should be. And that's 

 a very important role that I think people in government have been 

 a little concerned about taking on. 



Senator Reid. What incentives can be provided that would en- 

 courage industry to incorporate environmental preferable materials 

 and processes? 



Dr. Allenby. I can think of at least two that have not been used 

 to the extent they should have, although the/re being looked at 

 and implemented now. 



The first is procurement. Procurement practices should be 

 changed to establish within the state-of-the-art a requirement that 

 environmental preferably products have an advantage in any kind 

 of bidding process. It's difficult to determine in practice, but that 

 should be a policy. 



The second is standards and specifications. The biggest barrier 

 to the American electronics industry in getting out of CFCs, for ex- 

 ample, was Military Specifications and Military Standard. And be- 

 cause many of those were created in times when our concern about 

 the environment was not as great, they do not reflect the environ- 

 mentally preferable choices of technologies. We could do a lot by 

 looking at those two areas alone. 



Mr. CONDRAY. I would just like to echo the mill specification 

 issue. That very clearly sets the parameters for many of our cus- 

 tomers, and that is the specifications set by government through 

 the military process, the DOD system, and they're very specific and 

 highly regimented. And that would be a real incentive, I think, to 

 go and revisit and revise those, and I know DOD has talked about 

 that but I don't think they have actually gotten into the process of 

 doing it. 



Senator Reid. Thank you very much for your testimony. You've 

 been both very helpful. 



Mr. CONDRAY. Thank you, sir. 



Dr. Allenby. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Senator Reid. The subcommittee stands in adjournment. 



[Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to re- 

 convene at the call of the Chair.] 



[Statements submitted for the record follow:] 



Statement of Hon. Michael L. Synar, U.S. Representative from the State of 



Oklahoma 



Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important oversight hearing and for 

 giving me the opportunity to testify today on the subject of the Toxic Substances 

 Control Act, or TSCA. During my time as Chairman of the House Government Oper- 

 ations Committee's Subcommittee on Environment, Energy and Natural Resources, 



