Epa administrator scott pruitt answered questions about his agencys budget request. It calls for major cuts and a reduction in the workforce of nearly 4000 employees. This hearing was held by a House Appropriations subcommittee. It ran just over two hours. The committee will come to order. Good morning. Good morning. Today we continue to keep all those affected by yesterdays events, including steve scalise, in our thoughts and prayers. We applaud the Capitol Police in being the first line of defense in protecting Public Service and visitors. We have a few of them here today. Thank you for all the work that you do. Turning our attention to the hearing, we are joined by the 14th administrator of the Environmental Protection agency, scott pruitt. Congratulations on your confirmation. You have joined a distinguished group. We look forward to hearing your vision and working with you to provide the resources necessary to manage an important agency. We are also joined by Senior Adviser to the administrator. Your firsthis is time testifying before the subcommittee as well. Welcome to both of you. Before we dive into the specifics, administrator prewitt, you have a tough job today. The 2018 budget proposes to shift 54 billion from nondefense spending to the defense side of the ledger. Those are tough lines to meet, and many tough choices were necessary to meet those targets. Earlier this morning, i along with Ranking Members of the subcommittee discussed the Defense Budget with the hearing with secretary mattis. That conversation underscore the need for further funding to support our troops and overall u. S. Readiness. I certainly wholeheartedly support that goal. However, a 54 billion in nondefense program cuts in one fiscal year is an untenable proposition. Proposed cuts of this magnitude would put agencies and important tasks at risk. I suspect a common critique you hear from other cabinet officials and may hear from congress throughout the budget process. That is why it is necessary that it some point the administration, senate and house come together with a budget agreement before we can have a common goal we can work with. Nonetheless, we appreciate you being here today to defend the budget that proposes to reduce funding by 2. 4 million. In many instances the budget proposes to significantly reduce or terminate programs that are vitally important to each member on the subcommittee. For example, the diesel reduction grants are essential to improving quality in my home state of california. So too are the targeted air shed grants, which the budget fails the Superfund Program, while considered an infrastructure priority for the president , is reduced by 31 . This reduction will most certainly impact new cleanups and slow ongoing cleanups. These are all proposals that we are unlikely to entertain. Further, the budget proposes to significantly reduce other important state grants, while asking states to continue to serve as principal leads to implement environmental programs. Finally, most geographic programs are proposed for termination. This is perhaps not how you personally woodcraft epas budget, but it is the budget you have to defend here today. I am pleased the budget supports the healthy investment in water infrastructure. The budget maintains funding for the clean water and drinking funds at current levels and continues to Fund Programs that create construction jobs in every state and in every congressional district. I strongly support the Program Giving its ability to leverage additional sources of funding. It could be a game changer to stem the growing backlog of needs for improving Water Quality and a nice complement to srs. Turning to policy, we all want clean air and clean water and a strong robust economy. My constituents in california demanded both a healthy environment and job creation. It is not an either or proposition. In Southern California we have made tremendous improvements in the past number of decades. It is important we continue to look for ways to clean our air. I support epas decision to recalibrate the implementation of the 2015 ozone standards so we can ensure our clean air efforts are carried out in an effective manner. I remain as committed as ever to providing resources to support proven programs that actually reduce particulate matter and ozone, and improve Health Outcomes for the impacted areas. Last years epa budget hearings, the subcommittee raised concerns that statutory obligations were given insufficient attention, while new regulations were prioritized. I think it is fair to say you bring a refreshing new perspective to the position. We look forward to hearing the perspective today. In forward weis can Work Together in coordination with our state, local, and tribal partners to find sound solutions to tackle the challenges before us. I know all members are eager to discuss various issues with you, so i will save additional remarks following your testimony. I am pleased to yield to my thank you and good morning. The Environmental Protection agency is responsible for protecting human health, the environment, ensuring clean air and health for families and children. The budget you have come with us come to us today would jeopardize our water and wreak havoc on our economy. Trumpadministration administration abandons the epa responsibilities to people by proposing a 30 cut. The last time epa appropriations was the slow was 1990. The administration with set the agency back 30 years, it the complex challenges we face today. Mr. Trump Campaign Last year on companiesthat allowed to pollute our air and water spewed waters. Mr. Trump is putting his antienvironment agenda into action. Executive orders have directed the government to ignore the significant cost of pollution and Climate Change to our economy. The Republican Congress passed a to keep coal mining out of our water, and it is toxic. The United States has become a rogue environmental nation when it comes to working on the planets climate challenge. This budget is the latest expression of the administrations willful denying of climate science. The earth is currently getting warmer because people are adding heat, trapping Greenhouse Gases in the atmosphere. That is a quote. Scienceget ignores that , and cuts Climate Change science 91 . Includes cuts so deep that 47 programs are eliminated, and many are relied on by and issues. One is energy star, which is safe customers saves customers billions of dollars. Manufacturers, builders, retailers, they all want the epa to continue this program. It also proposes eliminating geographic programs like the great lakes, chesapeake bay, which are economic generators for local communities. For every one dollar invested in great lakes restoration, there is two dollars return of benefits. Give the american taxpayer a great deal in return. They also protect their resources well creating jobs and promoting growth. The Trump Administration has shown contempt for science through this budget and policy decision. The budget proposes to cut the epa office of research and development by 237 million, or 46 . This office provides the foundation for credible science to safeguard human health from environmental pollution. Administrator prewitt, under your leadership, the epa dismissed work done by cancel the when you ban on a harmful pesticide curate i have a letter from the thatcan academy of people of pediatrics about this pesticide. It damages childrens brains. The evidence was disregarded. Evidence from doctors and scientists. Now this budget would stifle the very office that provides this information. The grantsposes that the cut 44 , that is 469 million. These cuts will cripple states and communities to implement programs that protect Public Health. I would be remiss if i did not call attention to the agencys workforce. Overbudget proposes to cut 3000 employees. These are scientists, experts and officers who protect the American People from toxins, carcinogens, and other dangerous chemicals. Gratitudem a debt of every time we turn on the tap water in it is safe. As we know, President Trump has proposed this destructive budget and administrator prewitt can come here and defend or promoted, that it is congress and this committee that will determine the funding. On may 5, President Trump signed into law, the omnibus appropriation bills. In 138 republicans voted together to fund the epa at a level which sustains the agency, supports a skilled federal workforce and protects Public Health. Mr. Chairman, i want to thank you for working with democrats to achieve that positive outcome for our nation. As we move forward, i know we will once again rely on each other to have a positive working relationship and i know i can count on you could however, i want to be clear i will not support a committee that funds the epa below the 2017 level. Let me close with why i feel so passionate. Radon is the number one cause of lung cancer among nonsmokers. Mr. Pruitt, this budget proposes to eliminate funding for the radon program, which saves lives. This committee, both the democrats and republicans, has always worked together to support radon. As a member of congress, i believe we cannot allow the harm done to American People that this budget would inflict, and i think the chairman for the time and i yield back. Thank you for holding this committee. I will get straight to it. 2018 budgetear request for epa is a disaster. 5. 655 billion, a staggering 2. 4 billion below the fiscal year 2017 active level. A cut of more than 30 . While you claim most of these cuts will be part of a substantial reduction in which would impact the epas ability to fulfill its Critical Mission protecting the air we breathe and the water we drink. Between your disturbingly close ties to the oil and gas industries, your past work to directly undermine the epa and skepticism that human activity plays a role in Climate Change, i suppose it is surprising you did not propose to eliminate the agency altogether. Lets be clear, members of congress from both sides of the scientists, Business Leaders and the vast majority of americans agree manmade Climate Change is real, and it poses a threat to our planet that must be confronted quickly and seriously. Here are the facts. Facts. Carbon emissions are creating holes in the ozone layer and contribute to changing and often dangerous weather patterns around the world. Asmate change has manifested catastrophic events that threaten our National Security and the livelihoods of american families. Is this administration burying his head in the sand, and according to a new poll conducted by the Washington Post and abc news, 59 oppose President Trumps decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, which has in short a unified, Global Response to combat Rising Carbon Dioxide levels in our atmosphere. 55 of people surveyed feel this decision has hurt u. S. Leadership in the world. Your budget request further demonstrates a willful ignorance to the pressing threat that Climate Change poses. Among the most egregious reductions and eliminations are millionion of over 300 for the Hazardous Substance superfund, the elimination of over a dozen regional programs, including the Long Island Sound geographic program, and a nearly 50 reduction in Scientific Research and development. Responsibility to safeguard our planet and in sure our children and grandchildren have a healthy future. Short ofet would fall this obligation. I do hope that congress will reject in a bipartisan way this dangerous budget and instead adopt spending bills that would interest in combating Climate Change, keeping our air and water clean and creating jobs, creating jobs for the 21st century economy. Especially green jobs of the future. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Pruitt, thank you for being here today. You are recognized for your opening remarks. Morning. It is good to be here with you this morning and i thank you for the opportunity to discuss the epas proposed budget. Is hollye at the table greaves, senior advisory to me on budget. I want to join you in expressing prayers for our colleagues after what happened yesterday. I pray for the recovery. Within the budget being the focus of our discussion today, i tought it important to note bring agency back to its core mission. As part of our back to the basics agenda, we are focusing on air quality, clean water and fixing our outdated infrastructure, cleaning contaminated land, and important updates that Congress Passed last year, getting rid of the chemical backlog. When i began at the agency, i said three Core Principles i which we were going to make decisions. The first was the will of law. An approach that one can simply reimagine authority. Agencies that federal work for congress. Any action by the epa that exceeds the authority granted by congress, by definition cannot be consistent with the agencys mission. Along with the rule of law, were focused on process. Beeness the agency have focused on consent decrees and other things. We will make sure that process is respected and implemented for the people across people people across the country to have a voice. Finally, we are emphasizing the importance of respecting the role of the states. You know a one size fits all strategy to achieve environmental outcomes does not work. What works in arizona may not work in tennessee. States have unique needs and i can tune you do i will continue to have discussion with you about how these outcomes can be achieved. I believe we can fulfill the mission of our agency with a trim budget feared we will work with congress to help focus on National Priorities with respect to the resources you provide and we will continue to focus on our Core Missions and responsibilities, cooperating with states to improve air, water and land. Clean air goes to the heart of human health. Are focused on compliance and enforcement. We of benjamins progress as a country through significant investment, regulations and industry and citizens working together. Some of the pollutants we regulate have dropped my 55 . Ozone levels of dropped 33 . We should celebrate this progress but also recognize there is work to do. Presently, about 40 of our citizens live in nonattainment with respect to ozone. We do have much work to do. It should be the focus of the epa to increase the number of People Living and working in areas that meet standards. The president has made clear that maintaining infrastructure is critical for the country. At the epa, that means investments in Drinking Water and wastewater and construction. These efforts are integral because it can reduce the need for additional Water Treatment and unnecessary cost. I believe we need to work with states on what they think is best to achieve these outcomes and what actions they are already taking to do so. The epa should only intervene when states demonstrate unwillingness to comply with the law. Willminated land, we punish that actors, those who violate the law to the detriment of human health. Gotten has enforced these programs. We will focus our resources on direct responsibilities. When we do not fit within the law, we create inconsistency. Regulatory certainty is key to economic growth. We need to outline what is expected across the country, because when we do our job well, we create Good Environmental outcomes. Members of the committee, i appreciate the opportunity to share briefly these priorities and i look forward to working with you as we move forward in this budget process to ensure we have clean air, land and water. I look for to your questions. Thank you. Thank you very opening statement. The forward move to questions, i would like to remind Committee Members we have a full Committee Markup of the mill, built scheduled for 2 00 this afternoon. 1 00, ih hearings by encourage members to abide by the fiveminute role for questions and answers today. Simpson needs to leave by noon to go to our friends funeral. If it is ok for the other members, i will acknowledge mr. Simpson. I think that is appropriate. Thank you. I have a couple of specific questions. One of them is, the epa has jurisdiction oversight on pesticide review processes through the office of pesticide programs. Lester, Congress Passed the pesticide registration improvement act. In recent years, we have seen lower levels of funding leading to an erosion of timely reviews while on the positive side, it was not cut as much in this budget as other programs within the epa. The president budgets proposes to cut well below the congressionally mandated minimum. With a Strong Office of testify industries what has access to essent