Transcripts For CSPAN3 EPA Administrator Pruitt Testifies At Oversight Hearing 20180131

First, i would like to welcome the administrator of the Environmental Protection agency, scott pruitt for your tax money today. With respect to todays hearings we will abide by the committees fiveminute rule for length of member questions in the first round. Time permitting we will also have a twominute second round of questions until 12 30 when administrative pruitt has to leave the building. Of course, members will have the ability to submit written questions to administrator pruitt for the record. Todays hearing is to examine the epas record today after the first year of the administration. The Environmental Protection agency under the leadership of administrator pruitt has been doing the hard work of protecting the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the communities our families live in. Mr. Pruitt has led the agency fairly. He is balanced with the need to prioritize Environmental Protection with the desires of americans have thriving and economically sustainable communities. His leadership of epa has vastly different than that of the last two predecessors. Under the Obama Administration the agency had lost its way. In some very highprofile cases the epa harmed the very communities pledged to protect. During the last and ministration epa administrators created broad and legally questionable that undermines the americans faith in the agency. These regulations have done great damage to the livelihood of our nations hardest working citizens. The regulatory rampage of the previous and ministration has violated a fundamental civil and Environmental Stewardship to do no harm. This failed environmental leadership has contributed to two of the worst government created environmental disasters in decades. The gold king minds fill in the flint michigan water crisis. Those disasters hurt people and many from low income and minority communities who can least afford it. Under administrative pruitt leadership the pa has taken a number of bold steps to protect the environment while not harming local economies. Administrator pruitt is a key leader of the deregulatory agenda including ending the war on cold. Scott pruitts at the helm of epa likely protected more jobs and promoted more job growth than any other epa administrator industry. He is done so while making significant environmental progress. The American Economy grew 2. 4 million since president from selection. This job growth happen in Critical Industries like manufacturing, mining and when the department of commerce has manufactures the beginning of 2017 which federal government regulations generated the greatest burdens the answer was clear. The pa. The top nine identified regulation that impacted manufacturing are all epa regulations. At the top of the list at the waters of us rule in the Clean Air Act role. Administrator pruitt is working to address these and other epa rules. His commitment to revisit misguided policies is growing our economy, manufacturing, mining and across the board. Two prime examples are repealing the waters of us rule. With regard to the clean powerplant, the Prior Administration wanted to put coal out of business. Twentyseven states challenge the clean powerplant because they saw what epa was doing. Epa under pruitt leadership is on the right track in getting that rule off the books. As he un dues that rule i appreciate the administrators desire to hear from those who would have been hurt the most. The administration is already held a listening session in senator luppercaseletters home state of West Virginia and the court to welcoming the va to a listening session in wyoming in march. Another key way to pruitt has put environment policy right track is the epas withdrawal of the waters of the us rule. The Obama Administration would have given epa almost boundless authority to regulate what americans can do on the property. This would have impacted farmers, ranchers, landowners and businesses. The epa can and must redefine waters of the us in a way that makes common sense. And respects the limits of the epas authority. This issue is a priority for my home state of wyoming as well as many other states. The administration deregulatory approach is working. The white House Counsel in economic advisers reports that the employment rate for manufacturing workers is low, the lowest rate ever recorded. The facts also show that according to the last energy and information Quarterly Report for production in west is 19. 7 higher than the Second Quarter 2016. In addition, the stock market is reaching record alltime highs. In ministry to pruitt has also made significant progress in protecting the averment and righting the wrongs of past administration. Hes made it a priority to clean up americas most contaminated sites. Hes held polluters with honorable even if it was his own agency that is responsible for the pollution. Pruitt rightfully called the obama and ministrations response to the epa caused animus river spell wrong. He followed and allowed for victims of this bill to refile their claims that had been denied by the previous administration. In ministry to pruitt also allowed the city of flint michigan to have their 20 milliondollar loan forgiven so that money could be better used protect the health and safety of its citizens. He stated for giving the cities that will ensure that flint will not need to resume payments on the loan allowing progress to updating flint water system to continue. And mr. Pruitt and the reward for good work is often more work. I dont need to tell you that weve got a lot more work left to do it knowing that on this committee we look forward to supporting your committee, your continued efforts. Id like to now ask Ranking Member harper for his Opening Statement. I want to thank you for finally getting his hearing on the books. Oversight is a critical part of our committees work and regardless of which party is in power i am glad that we finally have a chance to hear from mr. Pruitt today. It has been a while since youve been with us and thank you for postponing your planned trips to japan and israel to appear before this committee today. The first time in more than a year i have a friend who when asked how he was doing said compared to what and sometimes he says compared to whom and id like to say how about your predecessor appear before this Committee Six times in two years. Six times in two years. While your predecessor appeared 14 times and six years. Fourteen times and six years. You can do better on this front and it is important that you do. Today we not only will hear from you about how things are going at epa but also here tonight from President Trump about the current state of our union so its an appropriate time to look at the state of our environment. I understand that epa has been highlighting its achievements on posters around agency and we have a copy of one of those posters here. There we go. Lets take a closer look at what is being celebrated as achievements. First, epa has moved to repeal the clean powerplant but with no real replacement to build agencys legal obligations to protect americans from Carbon Dioxide pollution all while rolling back additional cleanair protections. Similar epa has moved to repeal the clean water rule but again with no new plan to protect the dirty water sources on which 117 million americans depend. Youve been touting the agencys work on contaminating superfund sites by repeatedly taking credit for cleanups completed under president obamas administration. All while proposing to cut the program by 30 . 30 . We gave epa more authority to ensure that chemicals being sold on the market are safe. That way families can have confidence in the products they use every day. Under your leadership epa has not use that authority so American Consumers felt that they dont have the confidence they deserve and that we intended. Finally, the pa has moved to repeal and reconsider or delay at least 25 Environmental Public Health policies and last year alone. Certainly it does not create certainty for the identity that you regulate and we represent. Those are not achievements. Those are the exact opposite. Clear failure to act. The state of our environment is also fundamentally linked to the state of our climate and what we see in 2017 alone . Second hardest year on record, multiple category five hurricanes resulting in more than 200 million in damages and counting. Catastrophic fires and was followed by deadly mudslides. Severe droughts that have wrecked habit on our crowds of and crops and rising sea levels plus frequent flooding. From alaska to delaware from maine to miami, change is affecting every corner of our country. Yet, instead of tackling what many believe is the greatest environmental challenge this epa under your leadership is choosing to wage a war on climate science. Epa has [inaudible] this epa replaced Science Advisors who worked on climate issues for years with individuals backed by industry. Doing nothing would be bad enough but the fact that this administration seems to be actively working to discredit and hide the clear silence is the height of your response ability. For the past year weve heard you give responses to questions and members of other congressional committees and many of the socalled platitudes they often use to repeat are not really answers. Me run through some of your recurring is responses so we can get to real answers today. Mr. Pruitt, you often say that rule of law matters. Well, congress is right to vote for the Clean Air Act. The timeline and the epa must use to determine whether our country is meeting barrel standards for harvell was on pollution. Your epa has chosen to continuously ignore that very specific mandate from congress which leads states like mine and other vulnerable communities at risk indefinitely. You say over and over again that process matters. Do you really think you can delete the economic benefits of the clean water rule do you . Do you think that ignoring the advice of epa science helps us cleanup our nations water . Do you . Repeatedly insisting that you are committed to cooperative federalism at epa and i quote you need to Work Together with the states to better achieve outcomes yet this administration has sought to zero out funding for critical state programs like those to clean up the great lakes and Chesapeake Bay. Your epa has refused to allow states to Work Together to address harmful pollutants like ozone. You like to tout the us is quote your quote actually at 31994 levels with respect to our co2 footprint thanks to technology. That ignores the common sense and bipartisan regulation put in place over the last four decades. It did not happen by accident. Clean air regulations and advising natural gas and renewables and most of which your epa is now trying to weaken or appeal. You often remind people that you are a former attorney general and you say that your quote know what it means to prosecute folks. Under your leadership it has slowed action against polluters. At your time at the agency you conveniently forgot to mention that more than 90 of those penalties are from cases prosecuted entirely by the Obama Administration. You say that your quote getting the agency back to basics and facts like the one you to just last week to reverse critical prosecutions against hazardous air polluters show that your epa is moving us backwards all the way back to the early 1970s when polluters were disputing the most dangerous in the air we breathe and the water we drink. Perhaps the most egregious here was when you quote president obama said that we had to choose between jobs and growth at the expense of the environment or to choose the expense environment. Thats your quote. Mr. Pruitt, ive been saying that choosing between our economy and our environment as a governor and us senator my colleagues will testify to that because i know in our countrys history has proven it to be true. Ive easily. Hundreds of times. Maybe even thousands of times. It was barack obama, time and time again he told us in a quote him, there will always be people of this country who say we got to choose between clean air and clean water and a growing economy. Between doing right by our environment and putting people back to work. And that is a false choice. His words are those . Barack obama. He said it hundreds of times. Under the Obama Administration we were bound from the worst economic recessions from the great depression. We added 16 million new jobs while in 20 landmark environment protections and lowering energy cost and at the pump for consumers. I dont say this lightly mr. Pruitt but you are repeatedly misrepresenting the truth regarding president obamas record. Sure we can disagree about politics and thats policies and thats normal but to take the same words, the very same words that obama used on callous occasions and use him as your own and then claim that president obama said the exact opposite is frankly galling. Stop doing it. I will end with this. Mr. Pruitt, when you are sworn in as epa administered her you to the very same oath of office that every member of this committee has taken and some of us have taken many times. You swore that you would just faithfully discharge the duties of office of which you are about to enter. One of those duties is to be responsible to the coequal branches of government. Showing up more than once a year to answer questions. Mr. Pruitt, please spare us the kind of platitudes you frequently use now that your friendly here, i want real answers. My colleagues want real answers. I think the American People deserve releases. We look forward to those answers, mister. Thank you senator carver. Will now hear from the honorable scott pruitt, administrator of the of our mental collection agency. Your full and testimony will be made part of the official hearing today. I look forward to your testimony. Welcome to your committee. Members of the committee, senators, good to see you this morning. It has been too long. As was mentioned by senator carper and im looking forward to the exchange and discussion today. As you know i was confirmed by the senate in mid february of last year. I began my journey at the agency at the opportunity to spend time with the entire agency and i did, in fact, senator carper three priorities by which he would govern and leave agency. The first was rule of law. Rule of law does matter. Will of law is something that people take for granted that we at the agency the only power we possess is the power that you give us. As we execute our responsibility in rulemaking what you say in statute matters as we do our work because it provide certainty to the American People. Secondly, as you indicated in this process. Process is often overlooked. Process matters because of the decisions of involving stakeholders across the country. The epa proposed rules that we adopt in the comments we received and responding to those comments on the record and finalizing decisions in an informed way is very, very important. One of the actions are taken as administrator is to do away with civil practice that has gone on for years not just the epa but across executive Branch Agencies were someone will sue the agency and the decision will be made in the courtroom and it will be entered in rulemaking process will bypass entirely. Process is something we have emphasized over the last several months and something that i believe is working as far as clarity for the American People. As senator carper mentioned these federalism principles and statutes that you used in the past more so than others cooperative federalism is at the heart of Environmental Stewardship. I visited almost 13 states in the past several months and we visited was Dakota Country we talk about superfund to the financial rule in minnesota to utah across the country hearing from folks on how the school will impact and we have taken seriously those principles of the rule of law and process and federalism as we look forward to 2018 want you to notice theres opportunities we have to Work Together on important issues. The first is led. One of the things i think its terribly troubling is the lead in our Drinking Water this country. I believe that we consider in the structure in the First Quarter of this year and as we add into the year of 2018 invest in projects or changes to eradicate led for our tricky water should be a goal of this body and the goal of the and ministration. The president is supportive of that will forward to working with you to declare a war on lead as relates to our tricky water. Secondly abandoned mines across the is an issue. We have private companies who have the expertise and resources to clean up those abandoned mines but there are liabilities that need to be addressed. We should Work Together to advance an initiative to make sure we do all we can to clean up those abandoned mines across the country. Superfund, he mentioned senator carper and i think one of the most tangible things we can do for our citizens with respect to Environmental Protections is to make decisions in respect to the first fund sites across country. Portland, westlake and st. Louis missouri all sites the struggle for years to provide direction and leadership to ensure that we get answers in the sites. Its about leadership in money and i look forward to working with you in that regard. Senator carper, i would say to you is a close. When the greatest challenges weve had is a country as relates to Environmental Issues is the attitude that Environmental Protections and prohibitions. I dont believe that. I dont believe an environment protections is putting up but we been blessed as a country with modest Natural Resources we can use to feed the world and empower the world. We should as a country choose to do that with stewardship goals in mind for future generations. We can do both. It is something we must embrace. I hope we Work Together to achieve that. I look for to your questions today and thank you, mr. Chairman for the opportunity to open with an opening comment. Thank you very much. We appreciate you being here. With my time limit let me reserve the balance my time to interject as needed. I would say to our republican members to assist senator mccain, the senate will chair the Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing today. I know a number of you are committed to that so if it is okay with my counterparts here i asked that he be allowed to go out of order when he arrives and simply return to the Armed Services committee. Thank you very much. Administrator pruitt, thank you for implementing a new vision at the epa that takes state input seriously. We certainly feel that home in wyoming. Wyoming is a very experienced department of Environmental Quality in wyoming strives to be the best representative air quality Data Available to make sound regulatory decisions on issues like ozone protection, regional hayes and permits for Industrial Facilities. I think its very critical to have good data. As a result wyoming spent a lot of time and resources to review data and determine when the socalled exceptional events occur and they do. An exceptional event might be a wildfire causing air pollution levels to seem high and under the Clean Air Act states in epa are supposed to include Data Collected during these events because they dont represent everyday circumstances. 2011 to 2014 my state identified exceptional event that we asked to be represented and exclude the data from these time periods from regulatory decisions. In 2016 epa refused to act and there were 46 of these wyoming identified exceptional events between 2011 and 2014. Because this previous and ministration failed to act my home state bases real consequences for the failure to act is going to make it seem like there are violations of air quality and and the air quality problems are really not. This could lead epa to make future decisions on bad data and put restrictions on wyomings economy. I sent a recent letter to you explaining the situation that the epa had not yet acted on our filing and asked if you had a timeline for when the epa will be acting on wyomings 46 exceptional events filings in any thoughts on that. Mr. Chairman, a couple things i would say in your speaking with on ozone and we are in the process of designating a payment with respect to ozone now and we will finish that in april. There are around 50 or so areas that have not been designated yet that we endeavor to finish by april of this year. I think what is important we think of ozone theres focus on the parts. Billion reducing into seven parts of billion and that is not our focus. Our focus is on the issue of implementation that you raise. You mentioned that exceptional events and there are others. Background levels and in addition to International Global transport we have tremendous challenges with International Air transport on ozone and we also need to somehow consider as we engage in the designated process. We look at those imitation issues in addition to finishing that designated process by april and your schedule of events is important as we engage in limitation going forward. I reserve the remainder of my time. Senator carper. Thanks mr. Chairman. Welcome esther pruitt. You have repeatedly stated that you want to follow the rules and work with state to protect our environment. You available when it comes to clean air. Clean air act requires epa to partner with the state to address pollution. These protections are critical for states like delaware and our neighbors. Critical for others up and down the east coast. We are located in what i call the end of americas [inaudible]. Instead of working with states to address pollution your actions are making the problem worse. For example, he rejected a request from northeastern states to coordinate with up when states of ozone pollution. You also failed to answer at least six state solutions several of which are from delaware. Us epa to require up to install or consist of the operate already installed pollution controls. Last week you issued a memorandum to allow it to increase air admissions of toxic chemicals like arsenic, like mercury, like lead and affects the health of other states dealing with prostate pollution. Later on will get to questions yes, sir no but i have a limited amount of time. Ill start with yes, sir no questions. Answer them yes, sir no if you will and later on you a chance to expand. Yes, sir no, mr. Pruitt, did epa do analysis of the Health Effects of last weeks decision including analysis on the potential increase cancer risks, did you . Are you referring to that [inaudible] policy decision last week . Yes, that was policy decisi decision. Yes, sir no. As i indicated, thats a policy decision we made as far as the status of determining whether someone qualifies certain levels of statute. That was a decision made outside of the Program Office of air, policy of this decision. I find it well, ill ask another to yes, sir no, did epa do an analysis that shows exactly what facilities are likely to increase their toxic air pollution due to the actions taken last week . Senator, that decision was a decision that took major emitters under the statute theres major emitters of what i call. I dont have time and im asking for simple yes, sir no. Those are not yes, sir no answers, center. I have to explain what were doing with that decision. I find it incredible that epa did this seemingly without knowing or caring about potential Health Effects of his actions. Again, yes, sir no will you revoke this memorandum until the analysis is completed . In the public has had a chance to comment on it. If i may, i can explain our decision you want me to. If not, we can continue but that is a decision. Thank you very much. Mr. Pruitt, i wasnt happy with the obama epa asked for a sixmonth delay to answer delawares pollution however your ministration seems to be ignoring those altogether. The law requires an answer from the epa in 60 days and your team has had over a year to answer. Again, this is a simple yes, sir no. Will you commit to answering the overdue petitions submitted by delaware and other states on cross air pollution within the next 30 days . I commit to you will get to answer you. [inaudible conversations] mr. Pruitt, both the and ministration scooted that Global Warming cars and suvs was dangerous. This is known as the engagement fund. Federal courts of appeals also try to overturn it and when you appear before a straighter confirmation hearing a year ago you agreed that the endangerment finding was quote the law of the land. You often say that quote rule of law matters. You have made similar statements fewer than a dozen times. Such a confirmation hearing you have changed your tune. For example, last july he told reuters there might be a legal basis to overturn a piece decision. He also stated in october and december of last year that the process epa uses to make a decision was flawed. Mr. Pruitt, the white house, white house has said it wants epa Transportation Department to negotiate what i would describe as a winwin on cafe and tailpipe standards. That means it must be [inaudible] the authority to write is was in the first place. Another yes, sir no. For as long as you are in this letter to commit to not taking any steps to repeal or replace the socalled endangerment finding. As i indicated that is something that my time is just about inspired, yes, sir no. Senator, the cafe standards are for two we are. Yes, sir no, do you plan to take the steps to repeal or place socalled endangerment finding yes, sir no. Theres no determination on that. Is present. My time has expired to you much. Senator fisher. You for being here today. Epa is back to basic agenda has resulted in economic viability across the nation while still ensuring the epas primary mission of protecting our environment and i thank you for that. In 2017 nebraska hit a jobs milestone with Unemployment Rate of 2. 7 which was reported last december. Mr. Chairman, i would ask unanimous consent to submit for the record an article from the Lincoln Journal star highlighting nebraskas on deployment as the fourth lowest in the nation. Thank you. Administrator, this is a direct correlation to your effort at the epa to streamline the regulatory process that has for many years negatively impacted. Kreiders ability to hire workers because they are forced to allocate resources to comply with many commerce and regulations. This past year has been a Welcome Change or nebraskas public power utilities, farmers and ranchers in manufacturers and Small Business owners. I am encouraged by the epas recent decision to revisit the 2017 regional hayes rule which was issued in the final days of the Obama Administration. If implemented that rule would take authority away from the states impose a onesizefitsall federal Implementation Plan that simply does not make sense. Many rural utilities have been adversely affected by past regional hayes actions. During the Prior Administration epa repeatedly secondguessed states plans including nebraskas 2012 plan and instead impose federal plans that forced the end enforcement of costly controls that went well beyond with the state had demonstrated what was needed. As you know, nebraska is the only one 100 public power state in the country and that means that any cost is incurred by that utility from regulations is passed on to every single one of our citizens. Its very important to me that you get this rule right. Can you describe what additional efforts epa is doing to take improve the regional hayes program and the timeline for those actions and how will the epa respect states and make sure that electricity is not made more costly through these unnecessary regulations. Senator, thank you for the question. I would say to you one of the interesting pieces of information that i discovered upon arriving at the agency was a collection of about 700 or so state Implementation Plan to have been prepared all of the country for resources, expertise had been deployed to improve air quality. There was a backlog with no response. We put an emphasis on that and that backlog has been addressed but with regional hayes, its a portion of our statute that provides more promising to state. As you know, the only requirement is to reach natural visibility by 2064. The longer the states are taking steps to reach that level by that point they have tremendous latitude in how they achieve it. We are revisiting all those and looking to what youre for making sure the states are submitting plans that will reach those objectives in the timeframe. I thank you for your commitment to that and always taking into consideration the time and the expertise that states put forward on those plans. I would now like to turn to a topic that you are well aware of and that is the 2015 [inaudible] rule. I applaud you and the Administration Commitment to rescind the rule and focus on providing american businesses and families with a clear definition of lotus. It does not go beyond federal authority and can you share with us the next steps in the epa process for repealing this rule. Yes. This goes to what senator carper mentioned in his opening theme as well. This is not deregulation. When we talk about lotus or were not deregulating in the traditional sense. We are providing regular tory certainties because our steps be taken to provide a substitute, replacement. There steps to provide a replacement that we are in midst of presley. With. To lotus we have a withdrawal proposal out in the marketplace that will deal with that in 2015 rule to provide certainty we have a step to process that is ongoing to replace a substitute definition with what the textual and statute says is we are working to the process and i anticipate the proposal comes out in may april, may of this year and the proposal to two and it will be finalized in the end of 2018. Thank you, and minister to. I look forward to reviewing it. Thank you senator fisher, senator cardin. As well, thank you for being here. Maybe i preface my comments with the statements in regard to lad into the water. Their strong bipartisan report to help illuminate lead into the water and i hope we can have an agenda to, set on a bipartisan way. Is my time to follow up on our confirmation hearing and will not be surprised to know that. We have one new addition to our committee and my colleague holland and my colleague from maryland is on the committee. Youll also get i think senator carper is for his interest. We have synergy here in our committee as relates and we make process. The bay is in better shape today as a result of the state program and the recreational values and the economic values and land values in Public Health are all improved. I hope i will have a chance to ask you three questions and if i dont have enough time to save the rest for the record dealing with the Chesapeake Bay submitted by the initiation. The Chesapeake Bay office epa office is in annapolis and the support for the bay journal. First in regards to the appropriation the committee fy 17 budget passed by congress was 73 million and appropriation committees are working and their comparable in this committee on a bipartisan basis as an authorization bill after the president s budget at 90 million and we need your help as an advocate. I remember our conversation that the chairman talked about programs of which are local government to the federal government asking for federal governments participation and thats the program. This is a local program in which the Chesapeake Bay office is the glue that holds it together an independent observer and enforcer to do what we say we say will do. Can we get help from you to get the money in the present budget. Sometimes im not as persuasive as i endeavor to be and i mentioned to senator fun holland or the probation process and ill say the same thing to you. It is important i believe theres been tremendous success achieved through the program and i appreciate the congressmans response and ill continue to work with you through that to ensure that we address those issues. I want to talk to the Chesapeake Bay office which is located in annapolis today. It [inaudible] and theres the synergy in this office and as i understand there is some concern of gsa and that its located in a floodplain so it could be a need to relocate and i would ask that you get engaged because thinking the synergies with the other federal energy is important having it near the Chesapeake Bay is symbolic and important. The location that epa was looking at was to the epa office alone to fort [inaudible]. I can understand the cost issue of relocating to a federal facility but the problem is its not near the bay and secondly behind the fence line which is a significant cost because every person who visits the epa office has to go through Security Network which is already overtaxed because of budget concerns and the number of tenants located at fort meade. Would you work with us to get a more reasonable answer to the epa location with other agencies so that we can accomplish the purpose of federal partnership with the other absolutely. I was briefed on this in anticipation of her hearing and as you talk about their issues there and the current facility and we need to try to work through those issues to keep the facility there. Understand that dod does not want epa behind the line and theres a cost issue and i hope will be sensitive to that even though it may not come out directly with the va budget. I will. We talk about it being a private and Public Partnership and we have tremendous public support for the bay program in all of the jurisdictions here and a significant part of the cost burdens are shouldered by the private sector but Public Information about the bay is very important in the leading source of that is the bay journal. It receives one third of its funding to the epa and currently in a secure grant and i think youre too as i understand the decision was made to cut off funding as early as february 1 and i would urge you to give us time to give us time so that this Program Continues because it is a board part of our publicprivate partnership. Is an under the in anticipation of this year. I think that was a decision that i learned that decision after the fact and it was a decision that it is under recondition. Chairman, thank you for having his hearing. Thank you for your attendance. Let me start with let me start with i start with reporting requirements and i support this committee moving forward on a bill to provide certainty for producers. In addition to the uncertainty and unnecessary burden threat of citizen lawsuits that require this would add to our farmers and ranchers im also concerned about privacy. Most producers live on their farm or ranch so any Public Disclosure about the data is problematic and i secured language in an interior appropriations bill to safeguard the privacy of information and i would ask you mr. Administrator epa is required by the court to collect Commission Reports before congress ask and what assurances can you give kansas farmers and ranchers that any information required on those reports including the farm location will be protected from the public. It is an important area and theres more latitude we have for the surplus then we do and we are looking into all options to provide clarity but also i think opportunity for farmers and ranchers to know that as information is collected that privacy concerns will be addressed. Its a very important issue and something i think congress does need to look at very expeditiously. I think our team has worked with members to that end and hopefully we can address it legislatively but until that occurs were taking all steps available to us to address these issues. Thank you. If there are particular issues that you would like to raise id be the top of the conversation. Let me turn to another topic. Thank you for your efforts to approve an rfs pathway for the production of advanced biofuels. Once that is finalized the pathway will result in production of up to 20 million additional and biofuels. The. On that will close on friday and i proceed the progress being made and want to continue to and we talked on the phone for two occasions but we want to see the kansas farmers can utilize and benefit from that pathway. Can you provide me with an estimated timeline for reviewing and submitting comments and finalize roles. The. Discloses this week and im not aware of any that came in so its difficult to say. I understand the urgency and that something we will focus on from an Office Perspective we ask your team to get back to me. I will be key. A more general question the voices of farmers and ranchers seems to me to be often left out of the decisionmaking and i appreciate that you personally developed a stronger working relationship with the arboriculture community. In the future, if you have different administrations in charge of epa we may revert back to the old ways in which farmers and ranchers are once again left out of the seat at the table. Can you talk to me about the changes you believe will be carried forward be on your tenure and what is the longterm effects . As you know, i have an agricultural advisor that interfaces with the stakeholders and that person and position will continue to post my time at the epa. We also have the smart sector strategy which is an effort on our part to work with those across various issues from air, water, chemical, across the things regulate to deal with issues prospectively and proactively as opposed to this responding role. The sector is in the smart sector strategy and hopefully that will live on as well but that is something weve instituted. Thinking. Mr. Chairman, thanks very much senator parker. I echo the concerns that would be helpful if you are here more often. First and foremost, talking about super funds. I was alarmed and i know this is a budget recommendation about 30 cut in this is an area that means a lot more tension and in the last congress i asked for more information about super funds that are increasing in our country. You know this, im sure, but 11 Million People including 3 million children live within a mile of the superfund site and we have a lot of data now coming out of princeton that shows that People Living around superfund sites, children born have really high rates of birth defects and significantly higher rates of autism. Superfund sites dont just contaminate the ground in the water and we know these perfects and Serious Problems could come from a lot of other contaminants near. There is an urgent risk that a study and i know youre familiar with this recent analysis that said superfund sites are at risk of flooding due to some of the impacts that we see with the climate changing. Thirtyfive of those flood zone superfund sites are located in new jersey and is a big concern in my state. Last week one of the staffers told the house energy and commerce, excuse me, house energy and Commerce Committee we have to respond to this comment challenge and thats part of our mission so we need to design remedies that account for that. We dont get to pick where superfund sites are and we deal with the waste where it is. With this increased flooding we see the urgency and the threat of the superfund sites growing. Do you agree that we must design remedies for these superfund sites that right now are at risk of flooding . Absolutely. We had a decision made in houston that had the option in a harbor area and they remedied it for the last ten years simply a covering and we came in and provided a more permanent solution to the tune of 120 million. Sorry to interrupt you and im interested to hear more about this but could you get me in writing some of what youre trying to do to remediate these sites and give me a sense of a timeline and the resources needed for congressional action. S. Thank you very much. Have you directed your staff to do analysis on the sites . We had taken superfund and we have a priority to identify not just those 327 but what poses immediate risk to health. And love to get a q of our to understand your approach to this imminent health crisis. The next thing we talked about his environment of justice, its an issue ive done travel on and seeing realities in place like alabama, North Carolina and other states. Im not sure what im really concerned about is how much were taking to account the environment the burdens that are disproportionately impacting indigenous communities and low income communities. One example is december 19th epa initiated a rulemaking process provides protections provided to our Cultural Workers protection standards. Worker protection standard primary set of federal standards affect over 20 million farmworkers including half a million children from the hazards of working with pesticides. One of the changes im seeing is the epa is now considering lowering the minimum age apartment that prohibits children from handling the dangers pesticides if they are under 18 years old. The protection was put in place because pesticides can increase the risk of cancer for children whose brains are still developing and more. I dont know if you believe this personally but do you think that children handling dangers pesticides is a good idea and this rule seems to be a place for reason. Do you know probably about executive order 12898 which requires epa to identify and address disproportionately high adverse human Health Effects that activate and that affects disproportionately affects minorities. It looks it minority and low income communities minutes infected. Its one of the orders around environment of justice. Again, these are communities disproportionately in heart. As my time expires i will assess for a q as far back and finish my question you decided to move forward with this process to potentially weakening agricultural and the notice you have here and not only the requirements of a minimum age but also the designated representative required which also required populations that might not be english fluent and having that representative is the best chance of getting an advocate. Im worried about the beginning of the rules. The site the executive order on the president comes executive order antiregulation we dont have anything in here about expressing concern about disproportionate impact on low income minorities. For the record, recognize your indulgence here would you please be able to provide for me in the record how you are considering the disproportionate impact on minorities. It comes to this advertise will change that raises alarms with me of these honorable populations that will be disproportionately hurt whether its through children handling these chemicals or the lack of advocacy that might hit the vulnerable population. Thats a proposal so when the process of taking comments on that now so those issues will be addressed in the process. Looking through my comments. But with respect i want you to know that as an example in chicago with respect to super son fight their you talked about this during the comedic asian process hearing i very much believe we need to make sure that we make decisions on key issues like superfund that we spent time there listening to the stakeholders in making decisions. Its a very important aspect and will get the information to you directly you come to new jersey . Absolutely. Senator ernst thank you for being here today and for taking the time to answer questions. I really do appreciate that. As you know americans and to expect Good Governance from all of us and they expect accessibility, participation, responsiveness and accountability. Since taking the reins at the epa you have shown that you are not afraid to engage with the American Population and you just gave that example going out and visiting the sites for superfund. You have also shown that you are willing to hear firsthand the concerns of americans while giving those that are affected an opportunity to engage in the decisionmaking process. Thank you for that. In addition to the superfund issue that you just addressed in august of last year you travel to des moines, iowa and he met with over the stakeholders from across ag industry at the farm bureau. We left that roundtable encouraged by what we heard and what we were able to engage in knowing that we do now have a partner in epa. Under your leadership epa has taken necessary actions to walk back and repeal destructive obama era rules that dispensed earlier today like lotus and the clean power plan. Those are all things that have harmed our farmers and ranchers in our constituents at large. Most of bradley, he followed the rule of law and filled the administrations promise protecting highquality american jobs by providing key commitments to maintain the letter and spirit of the renewable standard and i thank you again on behalf of i was farmers and Rural Communities. All of these actions that created certainty kick started Economic Growth generated countless jobs across the country. You are back to basic approach has helped i was on the planet rate dip below 3 for the first time year 2000. During the more recent trip to december 1st you noted that epa was actively exploring whether it just Legal Authority to issue a nationwide rvp or re vapor pressure waiver. Three months ago you sent a letter to a group of senators, myself included, stating he would look at ways epa could fix the restriction preventing a 15 from being sold during our summer months. Can you give me an update on where this stands and to you today have clarification on whether or not the agency can extend the waiver to ensure that our consumers have yearround access. Senator, thank you for your comments. It is not really a policy issue but its a determination about the Legal Authority on whether it can be granted nationally or not. It is my understanding that we have proposed legislation and we have talked about that but the process internally to determine the Legal Authority continues. The mobile will have a conclusion soon. I made a second trip to iowa in the Second Quarter last year ensure that the stakeholders there. Very important were working to get an answer as soon can split your projected time frame . I dont i will get it provided for you expect that will be important to us as we move through discussion between the consumers between those that are producing e15 and of course those in the administration. We look forward to having that answered. Last august while you were in des moines you also touched on the potential benefits of moving to federal agencies or various departments out of washington dc and into the countryside and across the country where an Agency Decision are actually felt and this could be a relatively simple way to shift Economic Activity to hardpressed communities and prevent harmful rules and regulations even being considered. With a more decentralized epa do you feel misguided policies such as lotus could have been prevented and do you support relocating government functions outside of the washington dc metro area . Senator, and mr. Chairman and Ranking Member carper. This is a very important question in respect to how we do business in two services as an agency. Half of our employees are located in those ten regions across the country in half are here in washington dc and one of those things that we ought to engage in as far as the collaborative discussion is whether it makes sense to locate the units. In each of the state capitals theres a focus on what specific to that state. I really believe we have begun this discussion internally and i would welcome the input of members of this committee as well as congress and what makes sense there in relationship to delivering Better Services across the country. I appreciate that and i do believe having that easier access close to the people is the best way that our federal government can work. Thank you very much. Senator duckworth. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I hope administered through it you will continue to reese shutdown of the epa office in chicago region five which is i believe there was a memo stating that you wanted to shut potentially shutdown that office and move it to kansas leaving no epa offices in the entire midwest great lakes region. That is not accurate, senator. I hope that it stays inaccurate then you dont shut down that office. That is where the memo came from. It came from a memo from the epa. Last month before the house energy and Commerce Committee you said regarding lead and are taking water that it is one of the greatest environment of threats that i think the face of the country. You have repeatedly referenced your war on lead and said that you wanted to eradicate it in the next ten years. This was music to my ears. During your nomination hearing i have asked you if you knew what the safe lead level was for children and you had stated the time you were not familiar with the latest science on that exposure. Given your comments on your war on lead i take it since then you have familiarized yourself with the safe blood lead exposure for children. Can you take for your record what that level is. The epa has put parts of billion and they are thinking of loring that but as indicated, i dont think theres a safe level and we need to eradicate it from our drinking. The right answer is zero according to scientific literature. It be wonderful if you could take what your opinion is and actually apply it at epa im glad you have reviewed the Science Literature since we spoke a year ago and we saw you in this committee and you said you didnt know. Unfortunately, your rhetoric doesnt match your action. Over the last several months the administration has taken several steps to make it harder not easier to limit lead exposure. For example, the epa had planned to update the lead and copper rule in 2017 and finalize it in 2018 under the Obama Administration. Since taking over as administrator you have said decided to kick the can down the road by at least two years and now during your war on lead these updates to rule that in 2018 but 2020. This doesnt sound much like a war on lead. Yes, sir no, you finalize them to make this rule rather than waiting to pull years . Yes, center. As you know the 1991 letting capitals no, no sprint yes, sir no. Yes, sir no. Mr. Chairman may i. [inaudible conversations] the agency has been working to update the rule, senator, and i can tell the priorities for this administration. The twoyear delay is unacceptable because every day i have children who are exposed to lead and they say they dont have 700 is tweaked. The president fy 18 budget outline the administrations ten year policy priority called for the elimination of the epa Reduction Program that trains contractors and educate the public about safety removing lead paint from homes. The budget in reality also cuts millions of dollars in grant money to states and tribes to address lead risks. This is not sound like a war on lead. Again, given your war on lead, your words yes, sir no will you commit to prioritizing this program and making sure it is fully funded back we are working for working with his body to engage in it for sure spent on eradicating lead from our tricky water. What about the epa program that the president attempt to cut it is budget, actually, eliminate. It is a point of emphasis for us to update the rules and take an aggressive posture. So you will not fight to keep the epa led with Reduction Program. I didnt say that, senator. So you will fight to keep the program as opposed to the president budget which seeks to laminated. We continue this. [inaudible conversations] your marked up version gave 7. 9 billion so thats not in the marked up. So youre not going to fight for the epas led program. Something that is a priority for you. More on lead, get rid of engineers,. [inaudible conversations] i am alarmed to see that the trump budget slashes funding for the [inaudible]. How about this priority . We prioritizes to make sure its fully funded, the ground and the Water Program and surely the ground that the water is consistent with the back to basics version vision for epa. Very important and we will continue. What about the white house . Will you fight for this program. I will continue to work. I have to take that as a no not answering the question. Im out of time. Thank you. I get the impression they dont like you. [laughter] at least one. Anyway, been doing a great job. I do have something for the record is that in the article out of oklahoma talks about the improvements in the economy that are coming with getting rid of these Community Regulations and i would like this to be a part of record. And what. Report from suggest something a bit different. Without objection. Okay. I walked in just of the tail end of someone else who is not here now being and talking about the regulations. I remember so well because i was altering the obama initiation i was the chairman of ricky member and the guy sitting right behind you and i used to look at what is happening to our economy and it was in the process of being reversed right now but he was implying that some of the most Vulnerable People are the ones that we are trying to somehow or youre trying to punish and i want to remind you that we had a guy, i remember so well, harry, president of the National Black chamber of commerce and he provided some of the most powerful testimony that i ever heard when it comes to the effects of the clean powerplant and some of the other regulations. He referred specifically to the effect you have on the black and hispanic poverty including job losses and increased energy costs when it comes to regulation that you have been quoted as saying benefits, the lead, the folks who can least afford those kind of decisions the most. I would ask you how is the epa working to ensure that the most vulnerable communities are being considered that the agency costbenefit calculations are accurately portrayed in reality on the ground . Good morning to you, senator. The question goes to the heart of the cost of electricity and our power grid and issues around that and go to cost. Cant consider [inaudible] but we can look at these other provisions the cost of electricity. We endeavor to make sure our costbenefit analysis has consider those things which make sure that we make informed decisions as we finalize our rules. He was very in panic as to who was paying the price on these and i think sometimes previous immigration forgot that those individuals that are people out there that are paying all they can pay just to eat and keep the house warm. Thats one of the things that we have observed. Oklahoma has been on their own which is attacked from the obama demonstration which was way to attack them and can you explain more about how you see this being a positive environmental. The federal practice i mentioned in my opening comment senator with respect to regulations through litigation is something that is not unique to the epa. Something that has happened that other federal agencies and judges are involved in reform effort there. I think what is important to note is that as we engage in regulation regulation is intended to be laws of general ability. You go into litigation one party affects others and that is not transparent enough but also not fundamental and the process to rulemaking. That was the motivation and the regulation through litigation and we stopped that agency and that doesnt mean we wont enter into [inaudible] or settle cases but it means that will publish the settlements up to 30 days people who provide comment and those who want to be aware can dissipate if necessary. I wasnt here to your Opening Statement so i missed that its very good explanation. In an interview with the National Review last month you stated that we still have a lot of work to do on clean air but that was for the last decade. The epa was so focused on co2 that we let a lot of other things slide. From my view i agree with you that his singular focus on regulating a naturally occurring gas as a pollutant came at a heavy cost and now that youve been administrator for nearly one year what areas of Environmental Protection were neglected by the previous administration, do you have any to come to your mind . We still have 40 roughly of our country that live in areas that dont meet air quality standards, 120 Million People and as i look in the investment in counties that are making decisions causing data a lot for using model data is supposed to monitor that and that is primarily for cost issue. I think as we talk about the budget through this process it is important to look at ways that we can help states and counties put more monitors in place and get Realtime Data to ensure that were making realtime decisions and i love to commerce to achieve. Well, right now im cheering the Service Committee and i up to the fact that you are here. Why in the world did you agree to to have hours . Thats in and point. Possibly done before that time, senator. Well have a chance to come back. Senator, used to blame ryan jackson and ill do the same. Senator whitehouse. [laughter] thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Pruitt, welcome to the committee. Let me start by asking unanimous consent to put three documents on record. One is the report entitled abandoning science device by the center of science democracy and with it internal documents from the epa to chronicle how political policies are not one the clean air Scientific Advisory committee. Without objection. Thank you. Esther pruitt, you were confirmed about a year ago in february and about a year before that in february of 2016 you went on a radio talk show at a Radio Station called ksaq and. The shows host is a man named pat campbell. Im not sure if your mom that. I appeared on that program a few times so im not sure the specific program you are referencing the reason i mention it is because we have a transcript of the interview that you provided and i dont know if this is what you had in mind when you said you were interested in reaching Common Ground but i can assure you there are a great Many Americans who share the concerns that you expressed in the interview. The first one is this one. You told mr. Campbell i believe that donald trump in the white house would be more abusive to the constitution than barack obama and thats saying a lot. Do you recall saying that smart. I dont, senator. And i dont echo that today at all. I guess not. Im having technical difficulties. Anyway, that was one statement then the interview continued and mr. Campbell said the following. Everything that we loathe and detest about barack obama and the abuse of power donald trump is the same thing except hes our bully. Your answer to that mark. Thats right. As the interview continued mr. Campbell talked about the dad who was, as i recall, the interview was a veteran and was now elderly and server country and mr. Campbell said i had a conversation with my dad not long ago and he went on to say he summed up donald trump in one word. He said in this is mr. Campbell referring to his dad he said hes dangerous. You said you know, your dad is very astute. You will hear from the president tonight and i think the president is going to speak to a country in which millions of people share your concern of february for, 2016 about the president who you believe then would be abusive to the constitution, a bully and dangerous. In my minute remaining id like to ask you about your schedule because you have an unusual propensity for not releasing what is going on on your schedule. I direct you to friday may 5t may 5th. You spent the day in pulse oklahoma and that night you were scheduled to give a keynote address at a fundraiser for the oklahoma Publican Party because of the hijacked you cancel that event. Youre not allowed to go into fundraising for parties in the position that you are in. That was the original reason for your trip to tulsa that day. The only thing that shows on your schedule for that day is lunch with a guy named sam wade. It seems to me like it was an awful long way to go at taxpayer expense to tulsa for lunch with one guy. Could you please let us know what all else you did the day specifically did you go to the oklahoma fundraiser and because my time is up that can be question for the record. Senator. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, i have a letter that the arkansas Environmental Quality sent me yesterday in support of epas recent decision to approve the revised Regional State Implementation Planning to put the letter arkansas plods the recent improvement in regard to fostering increased cooperation with the states in order to achieve Environment Goals in a sensible and practical manner. Id like unanimous consent to enter. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I was very happy to see the epa approval provisions to the regional Implementation Plan meaning arkansas furled that we now have an epa was willing to listen to the states from proceeding to the role of improving air quality. In the past, we had a situation where the epa wanted to hear and put as long as the state agreed with them. If not, they got themselves in trouble. Can you explain your approach to cooperative federalism in the change were seen in that regard. With respect to the program i share comments and arkansas has worked diligently to submit its plan under the statute and i think that would be something i would highly for you. The agency needs to take a more proactive approach in working to submission plans to actually recognize their expertise and resources at the local level to achieve those outcomes and help provide clarity in time of getting that done. In the past we had an effort of displacing those they are and the state plans and i think that should be true. We should let them adopt their plans and to provide support to help them achieve that. Good, youre working all the states in that regard. What else such a confirmation has you done to reach out to other stakeholders besides one of the things that is so different is dnr in department of Natural Resources and it varies by state but the interaction to the governors is different and so we worked digital and diligently with governors both democrat and republican to ensure that issue that the state faces and they are aware of those issues that from my perspective and were learning from them and making sure that their respective executive Branch Agency are working with us to achieve that too. Its an effort to work with governors in addition to those Agency Partners that we work with a number of years. Folks on the left spent a lot of Time Resources selling a narrative that you locked career employees on the meetings and dont give their input considering the direction of the epa. Are these allegations accurate . They are inaccurate. Good. Some of those ive heard and im very encouraged for those sticky notes during meetings because i forget things often we want to make sure were keeping track of where were heading on issues. Im not sure where those issues came from. What again are the soft claims due to morale in the office . I think we have a lot of work to do. A lot of opportunities to do good things and we tried to stay focused on that. I tried to stay focused myself in working with those career employees we had our ses yesterday conference i extended and we talked about the importance of establishing goals and metrics the track of those in celebrating successes. For too long the agency has not been willing to stick goals and working to achieve that and i think that is something both across the board we need to do better at. Id like to reinforce the senators word discussion about how important that is. Can you again tell us how that is actually helping the environment between hurting the them diamond and. Primarily when you enter into a negotiation through litigation in consent it doesnt involve voices from across the country. It is short shifted. There have been examples where states have endeavored to intervene in those discussions and have been denied and an agreement is reached and then its foisted upon the states. It has subverted the voice of the stakeholders at the state level among others and thats not a good way of doing business. Thank you very much. Senator markey. Thank you esther chairman very much. Earlier you do not answer senator harper on whether epa performed an analysis on the Health Impacts of your decision last week to allow significantly more amounts of extremely dangerous pollutants to be put into our air. Your decision that Industrial Facilities like power plants, chemical factories, Hazardous Waste incinerators will no longer be required to use state of the art technology, the Gold Standard to reduce these harmful emissions. This should be a simple answer and there are 187 dangerous pollutants covered by this policy that you pull back and lets just go through a few of these. Arsenic. Do you believe that more arsenic pollution is horrible to the public . Yes. Do you believe that more mercury pollution is harmful to the public . I do. Do you believe that more lead pollution is harmful to the Public Health . Yes, senator. Do believe that more pending pollution is more harmful to the Public Health . Yes. Your decision allows more of these pollutants, more of these toxins to go into the atmosphere and to go into the air to go into the water and to go into the environment. Children will be exposed to these pollutants. Seniors will be exposed to these pollutants. We should have a Gold Standard of pollution control in this country. That is what the epa should ensure is on the book but youll replace the Gold Standard with a lead standard. That will not be good for the health of the children in our country. The president has a slogan of [inaudible] and here it will me make arsenic great again. This is not good for our country and not where we should be heading in that decision is an historically bad one of last week and i urge you to reconsider it immediately. On the question of fuel economy standard you said you are reviewing them right now in response to senator carper. The head of epa air office bill recently said that he has no interest whatsoever in withdrawing californias ability to regulate from a good, solid Public Policy standpoint, the very best outcome for us to achieve is one National Program. Do you agree with that . One National Program is essential. One National Program is essential. And you support once again the maintenance retention of the california waiver which massachusetts uses in many other states also used and you suppor california their ongoing discussions with those in california and the agency oversees these matters and there is hope that we can come to a resolution visit about the standards in april of this year. Senator, federalism is a mean one state can dictate the rest of the country but we recognize californias special status in the statute and working with them to find consensus around these issues. Massachusetts is part of that as are the states of many other members of this committee. We want to retain that ability to have the highest standard possible. Yes, we do want there to be harmonization and it happened under the trump, i mean the obama epa in department of transportation but we are increasingly fearful that there will be a rollback. Theres one thing would like you to keep in mind. We still import 3 Million Barrels of oil a day from saudi arabia, libya, kuwait, iraq, cutter and we should not be importing oil from these countries. If we can increase our fueled economy standards. Fracking is reducing our independence but so also is the fuel economy standards. We cant have no retreat because we are sending young men and women in uniform over to the middle east to continue to protect that oil coming in from the middle east. We have a moral responsibility to put the fuel economy standards of our vehicles at the highest possible level so i just want the epa and the Top Administration that the young men and women over there not exclusively but in part but to protect that supply of oil. You will never be Energy Independent and will never produce all the oil we need. 13 Million Barrels a day and we still consuming 19 or 20 billio. We should honor that commitment and we should honor what the massachusetts and california and the other states want to accomplish. If i may, senator, the issue you raised is important but the also the harmonization with dot. There are joint equities between dot and epa and we are working diligently with them to harmonize these efforts to provide clarity on these issues. Federalism is also interagency at the federal level. The most important is the young men and women and we should just ensure the standard status has possible. Senator carper. Unanimous consensus i could follow the comments or questions. Submit to the record. Mr. Chairman, regional record is a post office concerns. Thank you. I like to use my time to interject comments on the epa once and policy because in 2017 the state of connecticut supported the decision to withdraw the policy. The state of connecticut said such a policy discourages Pollution Prevention efforts and often forces Business Owners with very small actual hazardous and missions dispensing up resources not consistent with the air Administration Health and benefits achieved. State and by literary regulations agencies also must expense significant resources on compliance and enforcement of these facilities with small actual admissions often gaining little in air quality improvement. We served together in the last two years on the subcommittee with oversight of the epa. One item we would agree a coming from different political approaches is that sound science would be critical in our discussions. For that to go back a little bit. Senator markey has expressed his concerns. I did not hear the opportunity for you to respond and to share your thoughts on this. I want to give you an opportunity to share your thoughts and analysis on the decision you made in the reasoning behind it. Thank you chairman. The senator made reference with his comments that there was always a decision was about incentivizing investment by Incentivizing Companies to achieve better outcomes. The policy says that the major emitters make investment and achieve the outcomes to improve air quality or whatever the objectivist. If they meet them they should be rewarded. Is, if your company and invested to improve outcomes, you ought to be considered a minor under the statute once make those investments. Is to achieve better outcome. I believe that we can achieve better outcomes. I like to take another step with regard to sound science. We had discussion about the need to return back. We feel that in some cases we either win or lose when more information is interjected. I think we take our chances and look at the best sound science available to us. Can you explain the steps to make sure the Agency Decisionmaking is based on the most current and best available science . Can you elaborate how your guidance on the Scientific Advisory board and conflict event will enhance sound science at the agency . We have 22 advisory committees at the agency. The science advisory board, the board of scientific counselors or through the 22. Members of those committees historically have been able to serve all receiving grants and providing counsel under the statue to the agency with rulemaking. Thats something thats not consistent with independence. Their rendering counsel on the other, so we establish a policy to continue receiving the grant providing help you can continue or serve as a member of the committee or you cannot do both. Goes to the independence of the review with respect to the integrity of the process. Theres been discussion about biofuels and items, i focused on corn ethanol which is a critical part of Economic Activity. We have a longterm opportunity to add corn ethanol is a valuable octane enhancer with liquid fuels. Im curious, its an item i suspect you spend time on with regard to all of the issues. What are your thoughts . Are we reasonable in a longterm discussion about the viability and need for octane enhancements with regard to fuel standards coming to age . The agency has not been considered the fuel side of the ledger on how to achieve better outcomes. Europe has looked at that and we have not. Its been the design element of the vehicles, but the fuel side is equally important. We are looking at those issues. And that includes the ability and most efficient ways of delivering octane from any sources including ethanol . Yes, its a highoctane approach generally. Senator merkley. During the time that you have been director, the agency is taken 15 actions related to air quality. Fifteen diminish air quality and zero improve. Yet i heard about your interest in air quality but right now youre 0 15. My question is, how many of those actions were supported by the American Lung association which is made quality a part of its advocacy efforts . Im not sure. Its zero. Since 15 actions have diminish how many have been supported by the American Academy of pediatrics . Im not sure. To take a guess . Im sure you will advise me. I would say run the agency to improve air quality rather than dissemination in areas of ozone, smog, and marker in the list goes on. With ozone were implementing the 2015 standard as we speak. Thank you, have you submit your extensive answer to the record. I know youre very good at filibustering. Wed like to cover as much as possible to the public. You delayed the with complying with the rule in 2017. To my colleague you answered a number of items you thought did not contribute to health when you increase pollution. About a specialist. If you increase that does it contribute to americas health. No. Thank you. That really is supported by the scientists. The report that malignant mesothelioma you is associated with occupation inhalation of a specialist. It makes sense youd have that position. Patients have a survival of one year from time of diagnosis. In this particular area, the president has been clear about his position which is opposite of yours. So you disagree with the president when he says that a specialist is 100 safe. Disposal issues are some of the initial challenges. Im asking if you agree or disagree with the president when he says its a hundred safe. Its a priority chemical were reviewing. In that regard, theres a group thats a major importer of a specialist and it seeking an exemption from the asbestos standard whatever that might be. Are you inclined to grant an exemption for the group that imports 95 of this in the United States . I need to look into the status of that. But conceptually. The standard doesnt mean much of 95 of the imports is exempted from the standard. I need to check on the status a report back. It i encourage you to look at canada and brazil which has reached the conclusion that this pestis is hazardous. The have banded. Also theres emphasis at the p8 tony look at the production of new items that have a specialist in the while ignoring the amount of this pestis and the environment and causing problems. It frays and therefore causes contamination. Containment is not complete. Will you commit to taking on this pestis both with the new asbestos being put into products and also in terms of existing asbestos . We are dealing with it. The legacy issues you make reference to is very important. A recent report noted that although its one of the priority chemicals, vetted and nine other ip and slow walked in the agency. A useful walking the priority for americans . No. We had obligations year to adopt three roles with implementation. Weve added resources for the backlog of review. Its been a priority. Outside observers are finding the opposite. I hope will get details showing that you are working hard. It would be nice to see this being implemented aggressively. Thank you mr. Chairman and i appreciate the exchange you had with senator cardin on the Chesapeake Bay. Im hoping you will prevail upon the administration to put the 73 million or more for the bay program. You would agree, that epas decisions be based on facts and merit, be based on the law and [inaudible] politics, would you agree with that . Absolutely. We have to go to record and. I mean like in your procurement and contracts would you agree it needs to be based on the lot merits and not politics. I believe the way say generally. It disturbed me to find this report in december, is headline dpa contractor has been pastor scouring agency for anti trump officials. In exchange with a colleague on the up society said theres no reason for bad morale. Are you familiar with this . No. You should be because both senator Harrison Everett new letter. What the article stated was that the epa contract on a nobid basis with an entity called diviners public affairs. All your familiar with that . I think its the service. Thats right. The clipping service both wellknown republican operatives and they have a nobid contract. Can you commit that you will be responding to the letters from senators on this Committee Regarding of what happened . Yes. The contract was 87000 less. Is it appropriate this entity was doing searches on epa employees to determine if they were part of the resistance . Im not familiar with that but the contract has been terminated. Will provide additional information. A cop my eye in was something president the day journal is being reconsidered. It should not have gotten to this point. It worries me as a window onto politicalization at the epa is captured in this article. What happened is that shortly after the day journal published an article questioning and criticizing the position on Environmental Issues especially Climate Change and the impact it could have on the Chesapeake Bay, encourage you to go to the naval academy. They talk about the risks of rising sea level. But they had a piece in there and it was shortly after that the contract is terminated despite a good Performance Review by epa in april. The retired head of the day program earlier this month in an interview said it was politics that killed the funding for the bay journal. Have you looked into this at all . Is a shared, its under reconsideration. Unfamiliar with our taken steps to address it. We wrote to back in october on this issue we would appreciate a written response as well. In an exchange the folks at the bay journal with the epa folks making the decision specifical specifically, john caucus who is your standard, he said the following. This is john, quote well, Everybody Knows the American Public doesnt trust the press. He said no reason for us to run the bay journal. Is that a position epa takes regarding its review of contracts like this . I think i indicated that its under reconsideration. I understand that you understand this is now under litigation. We should have never gotten to this point. We should not get to the point where epas making clinically driven decisions on contracts where they are ever on political grounds. This is one where they found to be in full performance. I hope you will work with us to get all the documents regarding the decision. Its a small contract. Its meaningful to the bay journal which assembles this information. Im worried about it in combination with other stories of political decisions and contracting coming up. I hope we agree on a bipartisan basis that no agency should be basing its decisional politics. I appreciate your review but we need to get to the bottom of how it happened so theres integrity in the process. Think administrator. I heard its been going great. Its good to have you here on a regular basis. I appreciate meeting you and senator white house though he had recently. We had a very good meeting in your office, its great to see senator van hollen here on a committee that gets a lot of stuff done. I want to mention on the issue of Marine Debris that we talked about wanting to look at opportunities for the pa to play an important role. It is a very strong bipartisan support on the issue which is a huge issue. It impacts my state in rhode island in every state in the country. Another is followup for the meeting. I appreciate you working on those issues. Also the chairman measured some of the things that you have done in your focus on the confirmation hearing and rule of law process which is important you may decisions recently and i think your focus on the process. And on the lotus rule. Some of the complaints oppose this, there are 30 states that sued the federal government. There is no process, it was a huge federal overreach. I appreciate your drawing it back. You have the vast majority of the states and citizens. Another one thats important, glad you highlighted it in your opening testimony. You mention lead with regard to Water Infrastructure, water and sewer and i think thats important. I think you can get bipartisan support on that. I want to remind you that after the flint, michigan scandal occurred a lot of people talked about how we need to address aging infrastructure. My view is that we need to address communities who have no infrastructure first. Over 30 in alaska that dont have clean water that still use honey buckets which dont smell good, american citizens removing their own human raced from their house because they dont have sewer systems. Its a disgrace. We passed a bipartisan bill last year that advances funding for communities that dont have water and sewer in america. Thousands of my constituents. I certainly want your support on that. I like you to get to that be for the lead issue. Its a disgrace. No american citizen should live in a community where its a third world country. I think this goes to part of the proposal, 25 of the monies that are part of the infrastructure package will go to Rural Communities and i think Water Infrastructure is important as you have identified. Im hoping we will address those issues. With respect to lead its and if a structure issue but those communities theres opportunities across the spectrum. I like to touch on another one. I want to work with you and your team on abandoned mines. Its actually not just abandoned mines in america, we have a significant challenge with our Good Neighbors to the north there actually to east, canada where there are minds that impacts the waters, fishing and tourism of southeast alaska. There in canada to be heading to canada this weekend to meet with senior officials there to talk about this mine issue. But having the full weight of the federal government, the state department and epa helping us, canada has not acted like a Good Neighbor on this and they are very legitimate concerns so if i could get your commitment to help me in my state with regard to not just abandoned mines but transboundary in canada which negatively impacts clean water in america, can i get your commitment to work. Yes, we have similar challenges in tijuana in california with respect to water and sewage issues. I look forward to working with you. Will go now to twominute rounds senator carper would be first. A try to be quick. I mentioned that may fifth day, do you recall whether you went to that . We did receive an ethics review of it and i was authorized to go, but when the event was publicized they did it incorrectly. Will provide the information. We will cornet with this body. I dont see where you would block it out. All we have is the lunch. The day couldve been rescheduled entirely. But you dont know because its redacted and blacked out. The second thing is that i had a request into regarding the epa scientists who were instructed not to speak and then withdrew themselves from the speaking role at the conference, you may recall that, it kicked up a big fuss in my area quite a national fuss as well because it was a case of scientists being told not to speak about something they worked on for years. You answered in response that this will not happen again. And im delighted, i think youre right it should not happen again what we have not been given is any explanation of how it happened. Who told who what, i dont know why this is hard to get an answer. Can you tell us how that happened and give us an explanation, looking back on why it happened over the email chains or whatever the story was. Yes. In response, i am advised by staff that they communicated but i did not attend that event. So now its on blocking your schedule for that day. Senator. Thank you very much. In your testimony you highlighted how epas committed to doing regulation that strangling growth and job creation. Travel all 99 counties in iowa. I hear it from those experiencing tremendous growth as a direct result of on doing some of those how can the epa chart a path forward and maintain this Economic Growth trend . I mention the importance of the three process. Its not just academic. Its essential to how we do business. When we adopt rules it means theres uncertainty. Most the folks that a regulator want to know whats expected that they can allocate resources to achieve those outcomes. Those are very important fundamental principles to achieve confidence in the American People that were doing as well grounded in science and the law. And the remaining 45 seconds i would allow you the time to answer any questions you think it time to answer. Sometimes on this issues theres passionate issues on both sides. So i keep talking about civility trying to fight for jobs. We were started well. We dont celebrate our progress and success enough. We reduced over by 65 and made regular progress. We have reduce co2 as a country by over 14 . Obviously there government regulations involved but its a partnership, an approach that we have set into pace, striking the balance between the economy. Thank you for a partnership. Im holding in my hands a memo from the epa dated march 21 which is after you are confirmed. Is titled there for 2018 final decisions. Illicit elimination of the great lakes restoration program, numerous programs we have talked about including my previous mentioning of the statement about shutting down region five as a cost avoidance measure with region one, region five you may want to make yourself familiar with this to go back to your travel. In addition to your hefty travel schedule youve taken at least four foreign trips to include a recent trip to morocco acosta pics taxpayers a 40000. He spent four days promoting the sale of natural gas. Youre the thirdlargest producer i dont understand what the sale of natural gas has to do with the mission. Its inconsistent with your claims to bring back the basics. Natural gas is under the u. S. Direction of energy. Something the secretary of energy would do but not consistent with what the head of the pa should be doing. Will you provide this committee with a detailed schedule of your meetings and receipts for International Travel youve taken since being confirmed . I will do that. The last two or cancel, japan and israel. I assume the lack of these you do not find [inaudible] the centers time has expired. As we have discussed previously im concerned about the levels of a toxic pfo a and p aforesaid has been found throughout new york state. Just over you have to go Congress Granted epa the authority to regulate the safety of chemicals when it revised the toxic substance control act. Congress constructed the pa to consider the risk uses of a chemical that is intended, known or reasonably for seen your agency recently finalize this implementation roles. Despite clear direction the rules ignored the exposure to the past uses of camel chemicals. These uses pose risks because of past chemicals can still contaminate groundwater as is currently the case. This means epa will not likely studied the remedy. Im sorry,. This means that epa will likely not study the health risks from widespread exposure under the law. You said any action granted to it by congress cannot be consistent with the agencys mission. And its not consistent with the agencys mission. You direct epa to comply with congress instruction that all use of the chemical are steady . Were going to look at for seeable issues that were consists concerned. All the issues we have our legacy. We will focus upon that on the hudson river specifically i was glad to see the announcement that youre broadening the scope of the hudson river cleanup analysis to look at sediments and assess the impacts of contamination. The epas currently in the process of finalizing the fiveyear review of the effectiveness of dredging. Im sorry, im so awkward today. Im concerned that in the draft review report epa determined that while the remedy is not protective no removal is needed even the restrictions on the consumption of fish are expected to remain for more than 50 years. We strongly disagree with epas analysis. Will you incorporate the new sampling data in the fiveyear review analysis . There has been no determination on that. I am concern. There has been pcb found in the floodplain the 40 miles that have been dredge. Theres a lot of work to be done. We personally review the final report before its released to make sure that the concerns raised are fully addressed . Yes. December epa released a list of 21 superfund sites that need immediate action. Despite the fact that there is the super funds in our state. Additionally is my understanding when the freedom of information request was filed the response was that not a single document from this task force existed other than the final memo. That is not true. Will you commit to producing all documents related to how they develop these recommendations and the sites within 15 Business Days . Given your focus and interest in superfund sites, do believe its wise to cut the budget for epa superfund program. With respect to that process i made it clear we will continue to work to make sure priorities are funded. Im concerned about orphan sites. To greater challenge beyond money but Money Matters to our success. We will continue the discussion. There is a fullpage article in the Washington Post on friday, january 26, 2018 about going through the work the administrators doing with regards to super funds talking about that good job thats being done by the administrator. I recommend. I think the sites we highlighted lester were not meant to be exclusive. We see media progress can be made in the timeframe. The list will be populated with new sites. It was a matter of providing focus to our land Emergency Office on getting achievements in this. I ask unanimous consent to submit superfund materials including several news articles about epas superfund activities including one that found that those started by mr. Pruitt was the work of the Obama Administration. Without objection i will submit this article. Since run the other committee and not able to be here during this time was told theres a few things for you do not have ample time to respond theres two questions i wanted to ask. Youve been vocal about the differences of the pa the about stewardship versus prohibition. Weve been through prohibition, whats the difference in how are you moving epa. Its something that the American People in this work needs to wrestle with what is true environmentalism. As we asking it into the in a look at it as a prohibition with even though we have Natural Resources we never done that as a country. Implementing technology and innovation. The American People expect us to use the Natural Resources and focus on stewardship. Thats something we intend on talking about in 2018 and getting back to the basics as far as outcomes. What are the enforcement response efforts that you show that you take your row is your stewart seriously. Its interesting, theyre saying the superfund is the work of the previous administration. We take cases, proud of the work that weve done over the past year getting accountability. For example i mentioned earlier theres a responsible party that has put rocks on top of the site and i went into houston with their team in region six came up with the conclusion of the hundred 15 million that were getting respect as far as cleanup. Were proud of our employees who are working together to achieve this. Think you. Can i just say in this be part of my time, to that point, i understand there 300 superfund sites had to be cleaned up. Over 300 yet to be cleaned up. Administration asking for not more money to clean them up but actually less. Thats all. Real back. Theres 1340 plus sites across the country that are yet to be remediated. Most of those have a responsible party, company that has the money to do it. When he processes to hold them accountable. Thats our focus. You talked about having a red team a blue Team Exercise to look at. Set part of your plan. The discussion some we know the answer to, some we dont. What is the ideal surface temperature and 2100 . Something many has different perspectives on. Frankly could be used to build consensus in this body. The Clean Air Act amended in 1990 many who were involved recognize that co2 is not part of the discussion. We have much work to do legally and procedurally. This is under consideration. The white house has asked not to go forward with the red team, blue teen. On true. So the reports were incorrect . In this incident, yes. So the perception is that your entire intention was on behalf of the coke brother cartel continue to mislead American People about the significant impacts of Carbon Pollution contrary to your contention that you like to listen to scientists. Was it your sense that the scientific world the split on the middle if Carbon Dioxide is causing significant damage to rule america, tour farming, fishing and force . This did not originate with me. Steve koonin work for the Obama Administration something were considering based on the original publication. Ill watch with interest if you conduct it. This is just another effort to confuse the public over wellestablished scientific information. Thank you. It took me 20 years to get out of my life and now we have to have as your figuring out your identity for the record, superfund has been a priority administrator pruitt. Last week we announced they put both butte and anaconda which is separate superfund site on the emphasis list. Both sides have been fasttrack for completion and are getting through the immediate and intense intention. Its my understanding that the epa has finalized its conclusion that formaldehyde causes leukemia and other cancers, and not the completed new assessment is ready to be released for public review. Is being held to give us a status update and the handling of the from aldehyde issue on the conclusion that it in fact does cause leukemia and other cancer. My understanding is similar to yours. Ill confirm that and provide information to. We commit to releasing that report which is already completed in a short period of time once you have reviewed it . If it in fact meets the standards and you have. Ill make sure that you do have it within ten days. Ive also sent you over series of letters seeking information about several different policy processes that have been put in place. Ive not received in response to those letters. I asked that you look at those letters and provide a response in the shortest possible time. My staff and i said weve provided answers to 100 questions. If you have additional questions please let us know. Last month i sent you a letter encouraging epa to withdraw its proposed rule on uranium recovery the isr. Its interesting as this is a rule the Obama Administration proposed in january 19, 2017. One day before president obama left office. Since then, the Nuclear Regulatory commission has come out, and they stated theres no health or safety justification for this rulemaking by the epa that came out one day before president obama left office. The regulatory went on to say that after almost four years the staff is aware of no documented instance of isr while being the source of contamination of an adjacent aquifer or nonexempt portion of the same aquaphor in which they are being conducted. Wyoming produces more iranian than any other state. Its vital to our international security. When can we expect them to scrap this unnecessary regulation . Ill get information on that. Is there final round of questions . I asked consent to have five minutes staff these questions. Since no one else i want five minutes. Have you had your second round . No, have not. Anyone turn that into five minutes . I object. Why thank you. Theres something called the golden rule. I just checked with my staff there has been no answer to the questions which i posed to so, i would ask for you to respond in a timely fashion. Reminded almost every thursday when we gather in senator in halfs office he remembers to treat others the way we want to be treated. Said only appropriate at a hearing like this but when were considering a pollution in the air of states to the west of downwind states. To the extent that this Epa Administration blew the golden rule is a good idea i ask you to consider applying this comes to crossborder pollution. When i discovered i could literally shut down would still be out of compliance for cleanair because of stuff thats up in other states. Mr. Chairman, since my name has been referred to, let me just respond and say, therefore Committee Hearings at the same time today. Were trying to balance, if we can treat continue the once youre punishing out the ones that have not had ample time to get their first round of quite crushing. Senses of fairness thats the reason. I ask unanimous consent to slip for the record the history of the obama epas years long process to address the role. This included hundreds of millions across involving epa, army corps of engineers and builders. There were over 1 million Public Comments received over this activity. I am told those comments were responded to. Thank you. One more question following the law, you said on numerous occasions the quote you the only authority they have in the executive branch is the Authority Given to it by congress. Congress was negotiating this epa came to congress this for provisions to allow it to come forward to band three highly toxic chemicals. One of those is so dangerous it has clinton killed thousands of people even when theyre wearing protective gear. They propose plans to these more than a year ago. A recents report indicates they may delay act these for several more years. So more people will get sick and probably some will die. Yes or no, we commit to using the authority and finalize these bands within the next 30 days . Its actually on the priority list. So, i will confirm and clarify with the agency. I hope that means yes. I like to submit more materials describing the record at the epa. Without objection could you just share your goals and metrics youll set for yourself for the your head. At the end of last year we solicited and surveyed our Program Officers to submit five your goals. In that dialogue, we had a collaborative discussion to set Ambitious Goals on attainment issues and other matters. The metrics, if you dont set a name any road will take you there. Were trying to set aims and objectives that are key Priority Areas from water, air, so we can track day in and day out how were making progress. You have not done that before. In fact we did not know how long it would be state sometimes do it were trying to find out how good or not we arent certain things and set objectives to improve outcomes. Thank you very much. I appreciate you being here. Without to hear back from you will. This meeting is adjourned. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] chairman. On wednesday, reaction to President Trumps state of the union address. With the discussion at the center for strategic and international studies, moderated by former cbs anchor, thats live on cspan. And at 8 00 group of environmental activist call with Bernie Sanders with t. Watch live coverage from George Washington University Also on cspan. Cspans washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up wednesday morning, we get your reaction to President Trumps first state of the union address. Join the conversation all morning with your phone calls, emails, and Facebook Comments and tweets. Then on thursday morning we are live in montgomery, alabama tour. Be sure to watch cspan washington journal live every morning starting at 7 00 eastern. For nearly 20 years, indepth on book tv has featured the nations best known nonfiction writers for live conversations about their books. This year we are featuring best selling indepth fiction edition. Join us live sunday at noon eastern with coal son white head asore of the 2016 best selling novel underground railroad. Other books are sag harbor. Special series indepth fiction edition with Coleman White head sunday noon eastern cspan 2. Congressional Budget Office director keith haul appeared before the committee to answer questions how the cbo analyzes legislation and makes economic predictions. Economy members asked about the future effects of tax reform and changes to the Affordable Care act, this is two and a ha this f this is two and a half hours. It is 10 00. And good morning, everyone, the hear