Lets go, guys. Lets go. The subcommittee will now come to order. Before i begin my opening statement, i want to make a general announcement to members about the process today. After months of trying to find a mutually acceptable date for a hearing, the committee was finally able to get a date with the administrator and we announced it. However last week we learned that the administrator was being summoned to meet with his boss, the president around lunch. Rather than postpone the hearing, or push the entire hearing to a Late Afternoon start time, or try to find another mutually acceptable date. We have come to an understanding of an idea for us to fully question the administrator. We will proceed with opening statements. We will recess at 11 00 a. M. , and reconvene in room 212 upstairs. I will also note that theres going to be a Voting Period in this last block and were going to try, with the help of my colleagues, to keep the hearing going through that vote series. I have done it before years ago. Its a juggling, but were going to try to get that done. Administrator pruitt, i want to thank you for joining us today in discussing issues the environmental subcommittee has jurisdiction over. The Safe Drinking Water act, and the Toxic Substances Control Act one that this committee is very proud of passing in the last congress. A few years ago we began to tackle and begin updating these laws and waiting for someone from your agency to be here so we can discuss the administrations position on these important changes to the laws and how epa implements them. Were also tasked with the oversight of these eshspa progr and look forward to starting the inspection process soon. You noted at the outset of your tenure at the epa, that your goal was to refocus epa on its intended mission, return power to the state and create an environment where jobs can grow and your agenda focused on the three es. Protecting the environment, economy, sensible regulations that allow Economic Growth and engagement, engaging with state and local partners. You also stated that the epa would, and i quote, operate with the statutes that Congress Passes and not reimagining authorities to pick winners or losers, we support regular impede job creation and we want to work with you to make sure that the epa develops and implements regulations that protect the environment while promoting growth and creating jobs. You said it best in a statement you made when you kicked off your back to the basics agenda earlier this year. We can and we will achieve a clean air and clean water and we will also have strong Economic Growth and job creation at the same time. We have some specific areas of focus that we would like to discuss today, and continue to work on with you and your staff as we go forward. The first is superfund cleanup. You have indicated that superfund cleanup is a priority of the agency and that several Cleanup Sites have been restored as the agencys core mission, and you also said you intend to find ways to cut through bureaucratic red tape that has slowed the cleaning up of superfund sites. We want to work with you on these efforts and Work Together to figure out what congress can do to help make superfund cleanups more efficient. The next issues are the Toxic Substances Control Act and the Safe Drinking Water control act. Last year this committee was responsible for overalling itaska, and we we also look forward to working with the agency as we have reauthorized funding and make improvements in the law in compliance with the Safe Drinking Water act. Last but not least the Clean Air Act. Our Committee Members are engaged in several issues, including the recent epa ozone standard, we also want to look into addressing the challenges relating to obtaining air permits required for new construction and expansions of existing facilities under epas existing new source program. The long and the short of it is that we have an agenda packed with oversight and legislative activities and we need the epa to be engaged participants that works with us as we move forward. We need to ensure that the agency sends witnesses to us and we will work with you to determine where you need to act to accomplish your mission. The agencys goals toward economic practicalities and restoring confidence to regulated entities across the country. Thank you for coming up here and we look forward to continuing this conversation in the new year. And with that, i will yield back my time and turn to my friend from new york for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chair. And thank you, administrator pruitt. Thank you for being here this morning, however, i fully expected that you, mr. Administrato administrator, as a proud oklahoman, would have been here sooner. All right, in all seriousness. In all seriousness, mr. Administrator, i hope this is the first of many appearances, regular appearances before our energy and commerce committee, your predecessors came before this committee frequently and i can tell you that it wasnt because they liked being berated every other fife mve minutes fo few hours, it was because they understood they had a responsibility to be accountable to congress. So i expect moving forward you will provide administration witnesses, response to letters and Technical Assistance quickly when we ask. I know members have a serious concern about the direction of the epa in the past year, which is why theres so much interest in todays hearing. Members will raise questions about how you have chosen to be a steward of taxpayer funds, who has had access to you and the growing influence of industry at the agency. Members will also question the roll back of a number of safeguard that were put into place to protect human health. In july the New York Times published an article, counsel by industry not staff, epa chief is off to a blazing start. Which reported more than 30 environmental rules being delayed or undone. And often these Public Health safeguards are being undone without any legal or scientific justification. I think it is worthy noting that historically the majority of epa challenges have epas decisions should be guided by sound science, not corporate interests and these concerns touch every office under your charge, clean water, air quality, contaminated land, chemical safety, pesticides to name a few. From my view, rules across the agency are being undone capriciously with little regard to impacts or the science that went into developing them. In fact many states were partners during the process when these rules were developed. Frankly i believe epa as all the signs of an agency captured by an industry. It should isnnt need to be particularly concerned about Agency Actions on Climate Change, the Fourth National climate assessments Climate Science special report, a thorough, comprehensive report by the federal government has rr reaffirmed what the scientific tick community has long known, Climate Change is real, and a serious threat to our people and our economy. Despite the consensus, epa has begun to roll back rules at the behest of special interests as a result of Greenhouse Gas emissions this is just one example in a trend of dismissing the role of science at epa. The scientific integrity of the agency must be protected, instead, we have witnessed the proposed elimination of Research Funding and eroding of technical and scientific kpcapacity. The removal of information from epas website and the censorship of Agency Scientists from participating in Public Events are incredibly troubling, finally i want to take a minute to recognize the work done by epas career employees. I know these dedicated Public Servants joined the agency to protect human health and the environment. And they are to be commended for their hard work in this difficult environment. But as the workforce is reduced, as the advice of the experts are ignored and as morale at the agency decreases, i know there will be opportunities at other companies. We cannot afford to lose the knowledge of the people at the epa. I want to thannik epa employees and back to basics does not mean starving the agency of its resources and personnel, that it needs to do its job, it does not mean giving lip service to protect clean air and water while rolling back essential rules. Epa has been about making steady progress over time and epa has proven to be a i hope we will get better answers to some of these questions today, mr. Administrator, and again, we welcome you to this committee. Chair now recognizes the chairman frmr. Aldman for five minutes. I think this is your first oversight hearing on the hill, and were delighted that we could have you here to tell us whats going on at the epa, to take our questions and hear what we have to say. Im obviously disappointed the president called you out in between, but i appreciate that youll be back this afternoon and continue to participate in this process. Im going to yield briefly to my friend from oklahoma who would like to formally welcome to the committee. Thank you, chairman walden. Thank you for allowing me to participate. I have the great privilege of introducing oklahomas own scott pruitt or administrator. I want to thank mr. Pruitt for making themselves vablg for todays hearing. Administrator pruitt and his team has worked tirelessly to bring the epa back to its core mission to collaborate an approach which is a breath of fresh air. Nobody wants to take care of our backyards more than us and our states. Thats why i want to thank mr. Pruitt for doing whats right, by having the input of those with interest there. Mr. Pruitt, thank you for coming here today, thank you for making the whole state proud. I appreciate you and i yield back to chairman walden. I thank the gentleman for his introduction of our witness today. As you know,ed ed administrator pruitt, this committee is charged with oversight of the bulk of the policies that the epa implements, we are your authorizing agency or committee. Its been almost 10 months since you were sworn in as an administrator, so i would like to start what i hope will be a continuing conversation. Im particularly intrigued by your back to basics concept septembs and your administrative pursuits to its mission of protecting air, soil and water and doing so at the exclusive dictates of congress. I hope this will guide your epa, rather than attempt to inrun congress in the federal government or on the courthouse steps. I also want to thank you for the goal metrics to use and particularly want to know you have a plan to address staffing by the agencys Inspector General for over the last two decades. This is a 20yearold problem you are inheriting, but one we both take seriously. We appreciate your commitment to Budget Transparency and want the public to know how each law is being implements and how the money is spent. Back to basics is not Environmental Protection, but rededication to the e. P. A. s mission whether its clean up superfund sights, the Safe Drinking Water or keeping air clean and safe to breathe. This is the primary mission of the e. P. A. These jobs may sound money mundane and any football fan will say like the blocking and tackling techniques. We appreciate what you are doing on all of that. I want to thank you for your clean up in the portland harbor. This area is not in my district, but it is in my state. What happens has an impact on all people in oregon. You brought a fresh and welcome approach to the costly clean up. Unlike the prior administration, you proved this administration wants to clean up the environmental mess and in a common sense manner in close working partnership with stake holders. If you can do it there, you can do it anywhere. So, i thank you for being here and thank you for your collaborative work on the superfund clean up. We know we have more effort to achieve there, but everybody, well, not everybody, but most people affected by oregon city and everybody else say thank you. I yield my time. The chair recognizes the Ranking Member, mr. Pa loan from new jersey for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I served in Congress Alongside democratic and republican administrations. My experience, the lack of transparency and cooperation from this administration is unprecedented. The Environmental Protection agency under pruitt failed to respond to congressional oversight requests and a few instances where we received responses, they are profunction nar at best. Refused to respond to basic requests for legislation that has moved or is moving through the committee. Even today, after finally agreeing to appear before the authorizing committee, some ten months into his term, administrative pruitt is planning to leave after one hour. This is not the way any agency is supposed to interact with the authorizing committee. I would hope that this frustration is not only felt by Committee Democrats and i would hope to see a change from both the e. P. A. And overall trump administration. That applies to congress, the press, public and e. P. A. The stories paint a bleak picture. We know the administration has wasted more than 58,000 of taxpayer money on private jets and noncommercial flights, your schedule has been secret. We had to sue for this important public record. Career staff have been excluded for meetings. When they participate, they are blocked from bringing phones and pen and paper with them. Administrator pruitt used 25,000 of public funds to build a secret phone booth in his office to isolate his staff from any and all scrutiny. Why all the secrecy . One has to wonder. A long precedented assault, purging science from the Advisory Board and replacing them with employees. At the same time, ignored the advice and conclusions of scientific staff on numerous occasions. The hearing is about the mission of the e. P. A. According to the e. P. A. , the Agency Mission is to protect human health and the environment. No one cares more about the mission than e. P. A. s career staff. Ignoring the staff, undermining the staff and cutting the staff out of decisions amounts to ignoring and undermine thag position, in my opinion. Administrator pruitt has been on a mission of what it means to be an environment list. His words ring hollow because his actions undermine protections for human health in the environment. I have only five minutes, so i cant list tall actions we have taken to undermine protections from Public Health and specifically for vulnerable populations including workers, children and native american tribes. I want to give a few examples, first, pulling out of the paris agreement, second, the kleen power plant. Third, mercury, methane and smog and handing implementation to the toxic chemicals reform law signed last year. Versing the decision to ban the toxic pesticide. Undermining the Risk Management that should protect workers and communities and reversing Financial Insurance requirements, putting the burden on taxpayers. With accomplishments like this, its no wonder the administration is working so hard to hide his actions. The American People need transparency and they deserve honesty from the e. P. A. And white house and perhaps todays hearing is the beginning of a new transparent era whose credit he reached out to me in advance to the hearing and requested a meeting we did have. If the administrator wants to improve his relationship, the steps he needs to take are clear. He needs to provide the documents requested and will request in the future, provide answers to our oversight questions and make himself and other e. P. A. Staff available as witnesses routinely. If the administrator wants to earn the trust of the American People, stop the secrecy and war on science and reverse the rollback of Public Health. It is the mission of e. P. A. To protect the Public Health, not attack it. I yield back. The gentleman yields back his time. We would like to thanks e. P. S. Administrator, scott pruitt for being here today. You will have the opportunity to give an opening statement. We appreciate you being here and you are recognized for five minutes. Chairmen and Ranking Members, good to see you this morning. Other members, i look forward to the discussion today. A year ago today, the president announced my nomination to the Environmental Protection agency, thus begins the confirmation process in mid february and begin serving in that time frame as well. Its been a very, very consequential ten months. We have focused efforts on three Core Principles as we seek to make decisions. As i said, rule of law would take center as we make decisions around responsibilities that i have as administrator. Fundamentally, my job is to administer statutes you have passed as congress to advance the objectives and statutes. Clean air act, clean water act, a host of statutes. Rule of law matters. As we act and adopt regulation, it creates uncertainty in the marketplace. Those that have expectations placed on them dont know how to conduct themselves. Rule of law is not academic or legal, it impacts how we do our job at the agency. Process matters as well. It is this body that is required federal agencies, executive agencies to adopt rule making, rule that is are consistent with comment and informed discussions that take place over a period of time. It takes place, comment occurs, we respond and finalize the decisions. One example, during the rule of 2015, over 1 million comments were submitted to the agency as that definition was adopted. The agency took the very, very important step in responding to each to make a decision. The same needs to take place today. We have incorporated changes at the agency to respect process and make sure citizens concerns across the country are heard and we respond to the concerns. Thirdly, some of you mentioned this is a commitment to federalism. Federalism is not just a legal or academic concept. It is something you have put in statute, many statutes. You have authority to states across the country. When we Work Together with states to achieve Better Outcomes with air and water quality, it serves the citizens of your respective states. Todays after being sworn in as e. P. A. Administrator, i had 1820 senators in my office, democrats and republicans. We talked about a host of issues on air quality, water quality. We began a journey that started in february. I visited almost 30 states since that time, visiting with governors and deqs to advance the issues of the states. The reason thats important is the issues in utah, the second driest state in the country are different than the water issues in minnesota. We must work with partners to achieve Better Outcomes. That has been the focus along with the process and rule of law. I want you to know, the dialogue today is important to me. I have met with some of you individually. I have met with many of your colleagues in the senate, democrats and republicans on issues that impact their states. I know that these are difficult issues that we handle at the agency. I seek to engage in a civil discourse with you. I seek to have a thoughtful discussion of how to advance the objectives of what you passed. I appreciate the opportunity and i do hope we can begin a good discussion Going Forward in 2018. I look forward to the questions. Thank you. A full statement of the administrator is on the record. I would like to reckon myself for five minutes to start the round of questioning. Again, thank you for being here. At a recent oversight hearing, e. P. A. s office of Inspector General and the Government Accountability testified that e. P. A. Cannot ensure they have the right people in the right places with the right skills to accomplish its mission. According to the Inspector General, if e. P. A. Offices would probably achieve better results if they knew more precisely what the rirequirements were and the people they need to address them. E. P. A. Has not conducted a workload in that analysis in 20 years. It seems to me a back to basics agenda for your agency must include this type of analysis to make sure the agency is operating optimally. Can you ensure me you intend to do the work force analysis . We are engaged in that process now. Theres a gentleman by the name of henry radarwin. He worked for the state of arizona. We are partnering with toyota. The agency, for many years, this is something i found surprising, is not measured consistently. A dash board of monitoring and air quality across the full spectrum of our responsibilities to measure progress in each area on a weekly and monthly basis. Thats been incorporated with the e. P. A. And incorporated in the regions across the country. Thats one thing i will share that is challenging as i have taken over this position. We have ten regions from San Francisco to atlanta, chicago, boston. There was a great deal of inconsistency with respect to permitting, enforcement and the issues with respect to how we administer the statutes. We need a more coordinated process to ensure we dont have different approaches in region a in denver, versus region three in philadelphia. Its ongoing and very important. I think performance based, metric based approach to the offices we are engaged in are so, so important. It empowers employees. You mentioned the career staff at the agency. I will say to you, as we engage in our superfund focus, i have had career employees say thank you for awakening areas that have been dormant for a while. They are thankful for the focus we placed on the core missions, the measurement and metrics. Thank you. Thats important to me. One of the reasons why i care about the work force issue is the implementation of the Toxic Substance Control Act and when it comes to new chemicals. Since the laws enactment, they needed staff to address a sizable backlog in the new chemical application. You helped clear up the backlog. I fear as soon as the boar lowed e. P. A. Workers go back to regular jobs, backlogs will be the norm. What assurances can you give me it will stay on schedule for the future . We had many. I want to commend congress for the work done in updating tasca. That was a decade in the making. To do that was a very important thing. There are deadlines and rules that were supposed to come out by june of this year. I made a commitment during the confirmation process to meet those deadlines and we did. Those rules under tasca. The areas you site are the backlog. The changes you made in the statute required the chemicals enter the flow of commerce. The agency had to affirm or approve those chemicals and a backlog of 700 chemicals before we arrived. We did clear that backlog out by july by dedicating resources there. It is a commitment we do that timely. We are adopting rules now to ensure that the process is defined so that folks know whats expected to meet the deadlines Going Forward. Let me cut down my last question to a simple question on what is the we talked about west lake. Are you on track to issue the record of decision and can you give us a sense of timing . Yes, we are, mr. Chairman. We are going to we should be able to announce a decision in the month of january. There are proposals im looking at to make decisions on west lake. Its been a long time coming, 27 years. Its important to the people of st. Louis. If you dont know, 8,000 tons of uranium comingled with 30,000 tons of solid waste. 27 years to make a decision on whether to excavate. Thats unacceptable and the decision is coming in the month of january. Thank you. Let me turn to the Ranking Member for five minutes. Thank you. Welcome administrator. Thank you. During the confirmation hearing, you have no firsthand knowledge of the e. P. A. s scientific policy. However, you did commit to reviewing the policy and following federal guidance following scientific quality. Now that you have time at the agency, have you reviewed the e. P. A. Scientific policy . We have reviewed that and implemented it at the agency. Have you reaffirmed it to scientists as well as political appointees and e. P. A. . A matter of priority to make sure we have rules at the agency that are objective, transparent and its a commitment we are enforcing at the agency. Thank you, sir. A central component is strong safeguards against conflicts of interest. Have you required recusals among staff, including yourself and serious conflicts of interest . Absolutely. We have done that. Well continue to do that. Thats one of the areas thats been mischaracterized with respect to these Advisory Boards. Thank you. I only have five minutes. If i could move along. I have been concerned by the changes of the Advisory Board. Mr. Chair, i would like to enter this letter, signed by over 1,000 scientists to the record as well as the letter from the american geo physical union, which represents 60,000 scientists. Yeah. Im sure it will. Ill make sure the staff sees it. Thank you, chair. Administrator pruitt, do you believe scientists are a special Interest Group . I dont understand the question . Are they a fundamental agency . Or seen as special interest . We build a record. Scientists, at the agency, whether the chemical shop, air program office, its important that we hear from our scientists. Thank you. Thats a point of emphasis. Absolutely. Thank you. Do you believe scientists that receive e. P. A. Grant money are less qualified to give Technical Advice than states or industry that may have a financial relationship with the agency . I believe these advisory committees are independent advisory committees to the agency to equip us and make informed decisions about the rules that we adopt and the advisory committees, Ranking Member, may i finish . If you could just answer the question. I am. Okay. These advisory committees had scientists serving in an independent capacity. 20 of them made up committees that made 77 million in grants. That causes a perception or appearance and advise the agency on a host of issues. We went to those scientists and advised them to continue serving or receive those grants to ensure the independence of the council provided to us in the rule making progress. Can you provide examples of a time when an e. P. A. Grant recipient provided con flicktive advice . I can say to you, as a grantee, we, the grantor, Ranking Member and we have an ongoing obligation to oversee the grant, it creates a lack of independence. We can provide you examples. Many examples of scientists who received grants over a period of time that were substantial and called into question that independence and we addressed the policy implemented. Does it make sense to ignore the advice the e. P. A. Scientists are worthiest of grants funded . We are not. We said to those individuals they could continue receiving the grants and advise the agency in counseling or provide the authority we granted them to provide substance of the agency Going Forward. I would hope they would be seen as a reliable source. E. P. A. s actions over the past year led many people, myself included that e. P. A. s leadership had been dismissing the role of science and decision making. Independent and Agency Recommendations are ignored for the benefit of the industry. It happens with it happened with the kleen power plant and appears to be happening here. In many cases, Scientific Data are being removed from e. P. A. s website. This is concerning. Will you make scientific information, including Climate Change prominently available on e. P. A. s website. Science is essential as we make decisions on superfund sites and review pesticides. It will remain central and core to what we do and is, in fact, central and core to what we are doing currently. The time is expired. I thank the gentleman. Thank you for being here and coming back later this afternoon when the president concludes his meeting with you. To the superfund site, that was declared in 2017. Years later, they have a record of decision. One of the concerns from folks involved in that is there is a person in the portland area hard to hear, chairman. There is a person in the portland area to fully implement the program. You have a lot of people up in seattle. I draw that to your attention, they are concerned about that and urge that you dedicate adequate resources to the portland side so they can get going on that. You are very committed to that whole clean up operation. One of the other issues that has come up is the Clean Air Act, has the exceptional events, exception process. We have all these wildfires, horrible wildfires, again in california. We had them in the northwest. Its subject to hearings here about how that process works today, the amount of time, money, it takes to go through it to get an exception. What can you do to insure more timely, Cost Effective e. P. A. Process on exceptional event determinations . Theres actually quite a bit of work, mr. Chairman, in respect to ozone and events going on. Bill is our only confirmed aa at this point for air. Bill is leading a task force review of nsa and issues around background ozone. We need to provide clarity in that area so that we know how the rules will be enforced Going Forward. That clarity is not there presently. That is a focus of the agency as we go into 2018. We would like to work with you on that. Its important to members on the committee. How many confirmations are you waiting for for staff . How many confirmed people are in place and how many are you waiting for . We have one. One what . One confirmed. Besides you . Thats correct. How many pending . Well, we have deputy general council, the program offices, cfo, several that need to be confirmed. Hopefully that will occur soon. Wow. E. P. A. Air admissions show how air pollutants are decreasing in the United States over time. Since 1990, Carbon Monoxide is down 77 , lead down 90 . Nitrogen die ox side down. Fine particular matter down 37. Sulfur ox side down 81 . What role have advanced technology played in decreasing the air emissions . Substantial. Many dont know we are a pre1994 levels today with respect to the co2 footprint. They have been reduced by almost 20 . Largely through innovation and technology. We have achieved a lot for reduction of co2. With respect to stationary forces and other forms, its through innovation and technology. You highlight something i want to say. We need to celebrate progress we have made as a country with respect to the air quality. We reduced the pollutants we regulate by 65 . That is a good thing and we need to celebrate that. Thats been because of the actions you have taken here and because of the actions we have taken at the e. P. A. And also because of the actions taken by the private sector in states across the country. It is a collaborative process. We have much work to be done. 40 of the country live in areas that dont need air quality standards, 120 million people. We need to focus on that. Thats an important metric we are measuring. We need to celebrate the progress we have made. Thank you, sir. In addition, our committee has submitted at least five letters to your Agency Seeking records and documents and information. In the past administration, it was very, very difficult to get responses to requests. We appreciate the fact we have more than 1,000 pages on grant issues. We appreciate the bipartisan briefings you have provided in light of the hurricanes that took place. We do appreciate that. So, know that when we send a letter, we want a response and want to hear from both sides, i think, we expect all agencies to respond to our requests to do our oversight work. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield back. Gentleman yields back his time. The letters will be accepted in the record. With that, chair recognizes the Ranking Member, mr. Puliam from new jersey. Thank you. I want to talk about tasca. Unfortunately, under your leadership, e. P. A. Is retreating from the important task in regulating toxic chemicals. The framework rules published in june are not consistent with the law and very dangerous and worrisome ways, in my opinion. This is because nancy beck, a former lobbyist was allowed to rewrite the rules in flagrant violation of ethics rules. I have written to you twice in the rule makings, but have not gotten a response. I would like dwrou answer yes or no. Did you ask her to recuse herself from the framework . Nancy beck yes or no. I need to answer the question. Yes or no before you proceed with the answer. Nancy beck went through ethics review. You did not recuse her. Let me ask you that is something. Be respectful. Lets let people answer. I understand lets answer shortly and concisely. We have career employees at the e. P. A. Mr. Chairman, he refuses to answer the question. He has not recused her. Lets move on. I asked for copies of the ethics agreements and waivers. Will you provide them to the committee . Absolutely. Thank you. The framework rules have been completed and sent to offices for concurrence before dr. Beck starpted at the agency. They were rewritten after she started at e. P. A. By her. I asked you for a document tracking the changes made to the rules. Will you provide it to the committee . Yes or no . We will provide the information requests. Thank you. I would like to focus on a chemical undergoing review sorry, i didnt hear. I would like to focus on one specific chemical under going review. Thats asbestos. Unfortunately, e. P. A. s work on asbestos clearly illustrates the problems. It requires e. P. A. To look at the intended conditions of use for a chemical to find as the conditions under which a chemical is manufactured, processed, distributed and used. For the Risk Assessment, your e. P. A. Announced you will look only at manufacturing, processing and distribution and you will not include the use you will completely ignore asbestos used and disposed of in this country. Let me explain. It is the main source of risk from asbestos. If you ignore those things, you produce a Risk Assessment that fails to capture the risk to workers in ordinary americans. It will not be scientifically valid or protective of the Public Health. My question is, do you think you can ignore certain things that are incon vevenient for the industry . You are saying we will look at the process, but not how it is used and disposed of in this country. You understand what im saying . You raise a valid concern. I have had a conversation about this very issue at the office. I think you raise a very, very meaningful concern. Hopefully, you know, we will see action looking at the use of disposal. Is that correct . Thats a very important factor that we need to consider. Thats something i have raised with the office thats overseeing this. I appreciate it. Thank you, mr. Pruitt. The other concern i have is that now that they have banned asbestos mining, all the asbestos that is going to continue to flow into the United States will come from russia. Okay . Brazil banned it. Again, my concern is the e. P. A. Is basically protecting russian mining at the expossess of American Workers by not by saying that, you know, asbestos is going to continue to flow into the country but it cant come anywhere from brazil. Would you just respond to that . The fact that, right now, russian mining is the only source. I think i think, as you have indicated, this factor that hasnt been considered is something to do Going Forward. I think its important. Im not familiar with the issue you raised. If theres an impact, i look forward to that discussion. I appreciate, again, your willingness to look at that, mr. Administrator. The primary issue is what yu you raised, the disposal and something to look at. Thank you. Can i ask consent to put into the record a letter from linda rynestein and a letter from the safer chemicals coalition. Without objection. Thank you. The time is expired. The chair recognizes former chairman for five minutes. Thank you, chairman. I want to give Ranking Member tanka an aplus for the sooner comment. That was very good. That was very good. Excellent. Mr. Administrator at the beginning of the obama administration, there had been a Supreme Court case, massachusetts versus e. P. A. And said the Clean Air Act amendments didnt say co2 was or was not a pollutant, therefore it might be bound to be a pollutant as soon as president obama came into office. He asked the e. P. A. For a findings document. This finding document was rushed through very quickly within about, i want to say 60 days, and surprise surprise, said that they found that co2 was a pollutant. It was a career analyst at e. P. A. That took exception to that and wrote a scathing report that ripped it apart. That analyst was discouraged from bringing his report forward and ultimately forced to retire. Are you aware of that finding document and, if so, do you have any plans to revisit it . Well, i am aware of the e. P. A. Decision, as you indicated that occurred in 2007. There was work being done in 2008 by the Bush Administration that was left to the obama administration. You are correct, congressman, the work done in 2009 was excel rated by the agency. In fact, there was something done in 2009 that, in my estimation has never been done since or before that event, where they took work from the unippc and transported it and adopted it as the core finding. It was a breach process that occurred in 2009 that many believe was not handled the proper way to mask the e. P. A. Decision and the process involved both the bush and obama administration. I would encourage you to go back and revisit the finding document and get the report that this career analyst put forward. If you cant find it, let me know because i have it. Its fairly, not fairly, very damming on what they found. My second question, i have been told that you plan, at some point in time to set up a Red Team Blue team review of pending regulations where you have scientists basically engage in an internal debate probe the regulation, con the regulation to get a balanced Scientific Understanding of the pending regulation. Do you plan to use a Red Team BlueTeam Approach and if so, when might we expect . Its ongoing review internally. I hope to be able to do and announce sometime the beginning part of next year. That is something we have been working on several months and trying to put it together. That would be a process focused upon objective transparent realtime review of questions and answers around the co2. One of the most important things to do is provide the discussion. It hasnt happened at the agency. They borrowed the work product of the third party and ensure that discussion occurs and in a way that the American People know that objective transparent review is taking place. So, that Red Team Blue team concept is ongoing as far as an evaluation and we get there as early as january of next year. Good, i commend you on that. I think you know, under the obama administration, e. P. A. Became more than just an Enforcement Agency and more and more begin to intervene in the policy arena. In many cases, going further than at least those of us on the republican side felt they should go. Do you believe that before you set a standard, you absolutely ought to check with the department of energy and the federal Energy Regulatory committee to get a balances analysis of whats going on and do you feel that as we take a look at the reauthorization of your agency and the department of energy, that it might be necessary to try to rebalance that equation between the Energy Policy arena and the Environmental Enforcement arena . Well, as i indicated in my opening comments, congressman, its important as we do our work, we do what Congress Permits us to do. The challenge is it was opened about the power plant. Enter a stay against the kleen power plant. As you know, you dont get a stay of enforcement on a rule unless theres a likelihood of success later. There was an understanding the steps taken by the previous administration, Building Blocks one, two, three, four, a reimaginative authority that caused confusion on what was authorized and what wasnt. Thats not the proper way to approach the issues. We are addressing that at the agency and ensuring the rule of law in the process to make sure theres confidence in the rules we adopt Going Forward. My time is expired. I thank you for your answers. The gentleman yields back. An announcement, we are going to congressman ruiz with the last fiveminute block question. Then ill make an announcement about getting back promply at 2 00 for the administrator and us to follow up. With that, the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. Welcome. Im doctor ruiz and its a pleasure to meet you. Fine particle pollution is harmful to human health and can be deadly. Hundreds of Peer Reviewed studies found these microscopic particles reach the deepest region of the lungs and enter the bloodstream. Its associated with premature death, decreased lung function and respiratory disease. As a physician from the inland empire, some of the countrys highest levels of pollution, i have seen firsthand the impact of exposure to Dangerous Levels of pollution and let me tell you, it is not nice. It is not a pleasant experience to treat kids who come in with asthma because of a bad air particle pollution day. The Scientific Consensus is long recognized by e. P. A. During republican and democratic administrations is fine particle pollution is nonthreshold meaning theres no level of fine particle pollution exposure below which no harm occurs, including premature death. Administrator pruitt, do you agree it is a nonthreshold pollutant . Yes. I would say that matter under the max program, as you know, we cant engage in the cost benefit analysis. Its about health. Its an Important Role we play. Thank you. Administrator pruitt, were you aware the Bush Administration used this nonthreshold to justify their 2003 clear skies legislation cosponsored by senator inhofe . Im familiar with the legislation, i didnt know about the cosponsor. They did. The Bush Administration relied on the Health Benefits for Economic Analysis for the 2004 tier 4. Thats a good thing. Yes, it is. They did. They relied on that. Isnt it true the bush e. P. A. Agreed there are no safe thresholds including premature death in the 2005 clear air rule . I think you stated it well, congressman. They did. They recently confirmed administrator for air played a key role in developing those rules. Andrew wheeler, the nominee to be the deputy administrator handled the clear skies bill when he worked for senator inhofe. Administrator, are mr. Wheeler wrong about it . Wrong about what . There is no safe level for particle pollution . I dont think they were wrong. I didnt state they were wrong. You agree . Im not sure what your question is. He is doing a fine job, focused on the issues as is andy. I agree with the position its important and we need to regulate it. Wonderful. Despite this well established scientific reality, your proposed repeal of the kleen power plant, e. P. A. Assumes, for the first time, there are safe levels of fine particle pollution. Thats a concern of mine. Did you rely on Peer ReviewedScientific Study . As you know, congressman, no, we did not base that upon our withdrawal of the kleen power plant is based on the jurisdiction Clean Air Act. I have to have a reasoned basis to withdrawal. What is the point of thats obviously a point of difference in we did not base the withdrawal upon the issues that you cited. Okay. So, i do think the admission of the e. P. A. Was charged by the people to protection the health and environment of the American People so that everybody, regardless of socioeconomic status enjoy a healthy environment and live to the full health potential. This Clean Power Plan was part of that mission to make sure we protect the environment to therefore protect the peoples health. There is no reliance on any scientific studies whether they were Peer Reviewed or nonPeer Reviewed as you admitted. This is your interpretation of the matter of the e. P. A. , which we have begged to differ, of course, because we are here to protect the American Peoples health. Do you believe, therefore, that it was appropriate to reverse the e. P. A. Ease positions on the fine particle pollution . There is the assumption here that now the e. P. A. Is saying theres a threshold for that to happen. We did not reverse it, congressman. We are going to introduce a replacement rule before my time is expired. The time just expired. Be quick. Let me submit this unanimous complaint of the 2012 e. P. A. Into the record. Again, we will look at it. Im sure we will do it. The gentlemans time is expired. I want to remind my members pursuant to the announcement at the start of the hearing, we are recessing for mr. Pruitt to attend a meeting with the president of the white house. He will return to the committee to answer member questions. We will reconvene in 2322 raven House Building for people who dont know the operations. At 2 00 p. M. Sharp and stay as long as it takes for every member present and want to ask questions to ask questions. For our guests in the gallery, your seat here does not guarantee your seat when we resume the hearing. Seats will be allocated on a first come, first serve basis starting at 1 45. Should you wish the join the proceedings, its a smaller hearing room, you will need to be in line outside of 2322. I apologize for the inconvenience. The committee stands in recess. Friday on cspan, at 8 00 eastern, this weeks Supreme Court oral argument in the case of Masterpiece Cake shop on whether a baker can refuse to make a wedding cake based on religious beliefs. Then an interview with kellyanne conway. Im not here to read about myself or think about myself. Im here for something so much bigger than me. That is a lesson that a lot of folks dont understand. I have often said publicly and certainly privately, there are only two people who work here who were elected to do anything. Their names are donald j. Trump and michael pence. Watch friday at 8 00 on cspan, cspan. Org or the radio app. Tomorrow, President Trump holds a Campaign Rally in pensacola, florida. Hes expected to address tax reform in congress. The live coverage is 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan 2. You can watch online at cspan. Org. Or listen on the radio app. This weekend on American History tv on cspan 3, saturday at 7 00 p. M. Eastern, Yale University his torn on alexander hamilton. When washington became president , he made him the first secretary of treasury. In the post, he structured a National Financial system and pushed to strengthen and empower the national government, launching a fierce, political battle against those who wanted a far less powerful government. Thomas jefferson and madison were his foremost political opponents. Sunday at 4 00 p. M. Eastern on real america, the 1980s training film, unwelcome affection, about inappropriate behavior in the workplace. Here on the staff, i make a lot of decisions. I am the one that picks up evaluation reports, i sign threeday passes and leaves. A word of advice, if you want a loan, it will be beneficial to you. At 8 00, on the presidency, historian daniel to challenge and cripple the back of the United States during the 1830s. No president before said anything like this. Other president s have warned americans against entangling foreign alliances. They warned americans against sectionalism and partisanship at home. Jackson warned them against control of their own government by, in his words, the rich and powerful. American history tv. All weekend, every weekend only on cspan 3. Earlier today, minnesota senator al franken announced he is resigning from the senate amid Sexual Harassment and assault allegations. Here is part of what he had to say on the senate floor. Mr. President. The senator from minnesota. Thank you, mr. President. A couple months ago, i felt we had entered an important moment in the history of this country. We were finally begin