of your hand when you order your copy of c-span's 2024 congressional directory with buyer and contact information for every house and senate member of the 118th congress. important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. the congressional directory is $32.95 plus shipping and handling and every purchase up f support for nonprofit operations. scan the code or go to c-spanshop.org. order your copy today. >> c-span as you unfiltered view of government. we are funded by the television company and more including comcast. >> are you thinking this is just a committee center? is way more than it. comcast is partnering with committee center, street wi-fi enabled lift zones so students can get the tools they need to be ready for anything.

>> comca supports c-span as a public service alo with these other television providers giving you a front-row seat to democracy. >> environmental protection agency administrator michael regan testified on president biden's 2025 budget request before the city apartment of public works committee picky was asked about a recently announced role involving power plant pollution reduction and also to questions on water infrastructure and concerns about overage at the epa. this is about two and half hours. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> good morning. [inaudible] back to our committee --

[inaudible] additional investments to better protect the health and -- better protect the health and well-being of our constituents across america. those of us who care about the future of the plan i believe that everyone of us want an epa that has resources that it needs to take commonsense steps,, combat the greatest threat we face today on a planet, and that's our climate crisis. nearly day we see the signs of the plant in christ, wildfires, lands, pollute air filling our lungs, extreme heat gripping our communities and much, much more. scientists have repeatedly sounded the alarm say when running out of time through greenhouse gas emissions and environment change the health of our people. in 2023 the united states

experienced 28 climate disasters. let me say that again. 2023 looming united states experienced 28 climate disasters. for comparison, the u.s. experienced only seven climate disasters in 2013. only seven and 2013. in ten years the number of climate disasters has literally quadrupled. on top of that, the disasters the country experienced last year in 2023 cost american taxpayers a total of $93 billion, that is billion dollars with a b. to put that figure into perspective it is more than eight times the size of the epa's proposed budget for 2025. fortunately the proposed budgets would enable the epa to continue its work to address the climate crisis and reduce greenhouse gas emissions all while protecting public health data supporting.

would provide the funding it needs for the bipartisan infrastructure law as well as the inflation reduction act. directing the epa to tackle the climate change and address and grow the economy. thanks to these, we have empowered to help build a clean energy economy that has claimed millions of jobs across america lowering the unemployment rate to near record lows while also lowering energy and costs for households throughout america. just last month, the administrator announced it would

distribute some $27 billion for clean energy projects through the greenhouse gas reduction fund and as you may recall the greenhouse gas. thanks to the greenhouse gas reduction fund, homeowners throughout america will be able to make repairs and investments in order to make their homes more energy efficient and business owners will have access to the financing they need should they choose to d carbonite three buildings to install solar panels, just to name a few examples. and at the bipartisan infrastructure we invested in the work to clean up legacy pollution from contaminated superfund sites as well as to

improve solid waste management and recycling programs. one of many examples last year in northern delaware they received a million dollars from the bipartisan infrastructure hazardous chemicals and at that site to protect. there's many more examples like that across the country. i look forward to continuing to work with you, we look forward to continuing to work with you to support for decades to come. the epa also as you know to develop and finalize rules formed by cutting-edge scientific research to remove dangerous pollutants from the water that we drink and the air that we breathe. the epa's new climate in the regulation would result in billions of dollars in public

health benefits across the country all while encouraging america's innovation to help industry meet stronger standards on these timelines and by releasing new rules to implement like the toxic substance control act the superfund law and safe drinking water act. i think each of those happened in this room let me start out by saying you have a tough job i think we all have tough jobs, but also really important jobs and i think we are headed for the most part in the right direction thanks in no small part to your leadership during

an especially challenging time in the nation's history. we look forward to your testimony today and welcome you. before we hear from you i want to hear from the ranking member. the chair started off the same way i would start. that is you can tell a lot about priorities of an administration by reviewing its budget and actions it takes. this is where the statements will diverge. many of the concerns i will raise today are the same ones i raised last year and i'm frustrated not to have seen more course correction in the past years. if anything they've accelerated the pace of the crippling unrealistic explorations with a total regulatory cost imposed by the biden epa.

chief among my concerns is a group of the regulations that make up the electric generating unit or power sector strategy. your and hand with of the regulations is pretty clear impose new costly federal mandates and a short period of time to make continued investments. at this time it's not just against cole but also natural gas in american manufacturing. by issuing the rule individually, the epa tried to hide the total cumulative cost to businesses the end of the american people of its power sector strategy. but the collecting potential harm is daunting and real. the agency's rules threaten the availability of reliable affordable electricity at the time when american pocketbooks are already being hit by

inflation worsened by this administration's policies. during the rulemaking's energy and reliability experts sounded the alarm about the damaging effects each could have on the grid. at the end of last year, the north american electric reliability corporation identified the six power sector rules under development as having, quote, the potential to influence generators to seek deactivation despite the resource adequacy were operating reliability. they made attempts to claim the concern. last year at the same time as the good neighbor rule the agency announced a joint memorandum of understanding with the department of energy to coordinate and to ensure reliability is not harmed by the regulatory actions. the epa touted how they would provide a robust and durable framework for continued

interagency coordination consultations on reliability issues at a time of significant dynamism and the power sector. i do think the agency for responding to an oversight letter i sent asking about the memorandum of understanding. in that response, however, the epa stated that it's held a total of three meetings and the regional transmission organizations and independent service operators. three meetings, that said, in just over a year. the letter confirms this initiative is a little more than window dressing and not a genuine attempt to address the root of the self-created reliability problem. the demand for baseload power from data centers and forced transition is quickly rising and projected to balloon into the epa regulations would cause the baseload power supply to shutter. it is not rocket science to see the problem. demand is going up and supply will be going down.

the reliability is not the only area where the regulations are ignoring reality. i have repeatedly said we need the epa to finalize reasonable drinking water standards to protect from exposures. to develop the standards the epa ultimately released raised more questions. the agency has set extremely low parts per trillion standards that do not align with the levels other countries have said. it lacks robust support and doesn't fully consider the financial strains for compliance particularly rural and historically disadvantaged communities into they will only be worsened by the designation. they had a real opportunity here to set durable standards to remedy a real environmental concern. i would have been strongly

supportive similar to the obama administration's health advisory level and addressing through other statutes would have mitigated we've had one and maybe two hearings that show concerns about this. they chose decisions based on the debate rather than a finalized sound and practical regulation. foundational environmental laws such as the clean air act and clean water act are based on the principle of cooperative federalism. states lead in managing environmental protection and the borders while the epa provides support and only steps in when this data doesn't act but the biden epa hasn't followed the framework including in the so-called good neighbor rule

that i've already mentioned. despite repeatedly stopping this from going into effect, the epa hasn't recognized the failings of the rule quite the opposite actually because in january the agency chose to double down on the overreach and proposed to add five more states to its regulation. recent actions by the regions present another troubling example of the disregard for states authority. after a year of closed-door negotiations without even notifying the regulators, the epa announced a dissent decree with activists and environmentalist groups to impose total daily loads and west virginia. lastly, and you and i talked about this at the hearing before the appropriations committee. i am very concerned about the risk of waste, fraud and abuse as the epa manages the

unprecedented $41.5 billion and the democrats so-called inflation reduction act. the epa announced plans to obligate office funding for its largest program the greenhouse gas reduction fund which amounts to 27 billion between now and at the end of september. i would note 27 billion is nearly three times the total amount of appropriations the epa receives each year. it is an astronomical sum of money. i fear they will make a lot of mistakes in the rush to get this money out. i will go off script here, the response last week was you're simply granting this money down to eight different entities across the country. that said to me they are the ones that are going to be responsible for the waste, fraud and abuse. i think it is the epa responsibility and we need adequate oversight by an

inspector general. with that, i will turn back to the chair. >> administrator, welcome back to the public works committee. you are recognized to proceed with your statement when you are ready. >> thank you chairman and ranking member cap of thailand members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to appear to discuss the vision laid out by the epa's fiscal year 2025 budget request. for 100 million people for cleaner and safer drinking water and we've worked hard to write many of the historic wrongs the communities faced for

generations. reducing elevated cancer risks for those living near these facilities by 96%. the epa is committed to protecting public health and of the environment for all american people. but more than just the health impacts we are undertaking my agency is also working hard to implement the historic laws passed in the past agenda. president biden not only directly in communities nationwide but it's generated nearly $700 billion in funding for private sector manufacturing and clean energy projects protecting the planet and enhancing our global competitiveness. i was pleased to join senator markey last august to speak about how the inflation reduction act and the reduction fund is addressing climate

change head-on while unlocking billions of dollars in private sector investments to lower energy costs, improve public health and create good paying jobs. together president biden investing in the agenda and epa fiscal year 2025 budget request will continue to invest in environmental actions that would promote cleaner communities and produce economic benefits for years to come. last august on my journey to justice to her i joined senator sullivan and alaska to spotlight the environmental justice concerns of alaska native tribes. we met with tribal leaders and heard first hand about the challenges facing the communities including climate impacts and adaptation, food insecurity and border infrastructure. are there, he and i announced along with senator murkowski $50 million and funding from the president investing in america agenda that would help fund projects across the state.

upgrading the infrastructure fighting the climate crisis and advancing environmental justice. millions of people across the country are still grappling regulatory tools and partnerships that promote environmental stewardship but

reinforces market movement. clean and safe water is the foundation for healthy communities and the thriving economy. the challenges to achieve in this scope and the effect pose risks to the nation's supply and american people. the budget request includes a total of $101 million for two epa grant programs dedicated to remediating. for the clean contaminated land and water there's no shortage of work that needs to be done.

we but we need your support. the fiscal year 2025 president's budget continues to a stored progress and investments made by the biden-harris a administratin and positioning epa to advance our vital missionis of protectig public health and the environment. thank you for the opportunity to be here today to senate testimony for the record, and a look for to her continued partnership and your questions. thank you. >> i thank you>> for that statement. thanks for joining us. we thank you for your leadership and thank you for taking time to really talk the job. and thanks to your family for sharing it with all of us. about three and half ears ago they sat right there in the front row and said were willing to share the husband and in the case of your son, their dad, and sacrifice for them and we appreciate their service, to. >> thank you for that. >> i have a couple questions i want too lead off with. one is a question dealing with the general budget. and i'm going to ask some questions, senator capito will follow me. senator stabenow was here

earlier, if she shows up right away, she will succeed senator capito and then senator cramer and if she's not back, then senator ricketts is in on, on deck circle. .. while congress is steadily adding to its responsibilities. it needs more people within the additional funding to fulfill the critically important mission which is reflected in the president's proposed budget. here's my question. how it was additional funding the president has requested funding no? mission to protect the environment. >> thank you for the question.

it's critical to have our state to provide technical assistance demonstrate back in the region more than 50% ofio the budget wl go to regional staff to provide that assistance. assistance. but, we need resources to continue to deal with building our capabilities in the area of emergency response. whether it be the wildfires in maui or the train derailment in east palestine. where contingency disasters you have to respond to so we need to build our emergency response capability. we need to ensure the safety of chemicals that are needed to propel our electric vehicles, semiconductor industry continues to move forward. and listen, we went to continue to administer a congressionally directed spending assignments all across the country. such as the $4 million to the city of wilmington first tour separation. with this resource you will

continue to build that capability to not interrupt the economy but also provide technical ability so we can all compete at a federal and state level pickwick sort thank you. next question through the inflation reduction act in a bipartisan infrastructure much of which was authored in this room, this committee may distore historic investments to tackle the climate crisis make our communities more resilient at the same time. epa fiscal year 2012 a budget bills on those historic investments and reaffirms the administration commitment to tackling climate change with the urgency the science demands by dedicating $3 billion to climate related programs here's my question. administrator, how important are the investments provided by the inflation reduction act bipartisan infrastructure law and the president's budget for u.s. emissions to head up climate change why do these

investments matter? cooks these investments are critical to preserve both the economy in the environment. if we are able to leverage the historical resources that we received from the bipartisan infrastructure lot and the inflation reduction act we are able to marry those financial incentives with the statutory regulatory obligations that we have it. we are seeing significant infusion and technological advancements to help curb those submissions. but we are seeing significant level of resources to harden our water infrastructure per increase or water cybersecurity to make them more resilient for the changing climate in the international threats that we are facing. so, coupling those investments with regulatory obligations crates a win/win opportunity for global competitiveness >> my last question before yielding his epa recent efforts to cut emissions of greenhouse gases

and toxic pollutants from power plants are expected to deliver significant public health benefits spike focus some focus intently impacts to grid reliability related complaint schedules. my question, administrator, as i understand epa has carefully considered those potential impacts in the development of's new regulations could you briefly describe for us the mechanism to ensure grid reliability is maintained question but the second half is what actions will they take in the future to avoid challenges to grid reliability? works thank you for the questions. i'm happy you much the public health benefit. the public health benefits are astronomical in terms of cost-benefit 2035 alone our regular impact analysis estimates will have up to 1200 avoid premature deaths 870

voided hospital emergency room visits, 1900 reported cases of asthma onset. over three and a 60000 avoided cases of asthma symptoms so the health opportunities or grand. when carrying out our duties to protect public health and the environment, we teamed up with the department of energy. we have multiple meetings we had engaged with eei, those who are responsible for grid management. we understand are seeing increased demand. we are also under sink is a tremendous investment from historic legislation and technological advancement and investments in grid that will make all this possible. we are confident with mitigate any grid reliability issues that are current and that could potentially be a future threat. >> okay, thanks. >> thank you. administrator reg and i want to

talk but the power sector strategy and the six different epa regulations you put out all at once. and it 2022 speech you said if epa actions unfold while the rest of the federal family leading states and firms in the sector mobilizing the tools of resources, our actions a clean energy investment signals that they send will work as they should hand in glove. so, if i understand your statement by issuing six rules in a short timeframe at the same time the ira is being implemented epa rules will send clean energy investment signals to the industry, is that correct? >> that statement was intended when i address the utility leaders. we would issue for rules simultaneously. that was the focus on a wastewater discharge, cleanup, focus on controlling mercury on the fourth is reduction in carbon pollution.

when i talk to the industry leaders about was these regulations have to come from the agency. in the past they've come in staggered waves or ways that did not work in a cross purpose way. we decided i said this two years ago when i worked with the industry would put out for rules of the same time to have their own unique statutory authority and requirements but that they could see the cost associated and make strategic investments long-term investments to provide affordable reliable power question one to six instead? from four to six? >> we announced before the same time. quick so now we have six of the good neighbor rule and all that pulled together, correct question eric some of those rules we issued prior to >> you change semi- rules. you wanted actions wanted to be durable provide certainty. you have proposed the mention of an opening seemed to add five more states and 23 covered by

good neighbors. you're arty changing your rules even though you state you want to provide security or certainty. >> know when you look at the good neighbor rule there's a number of states that are actually controlling their omissions and not contributing to states next door we think about the good neighbor rule we are responding to the states that have said you have a federal obligation to protect our citizens. he also a federal obligation not to penalize us for doing what we need to do all other states may not be controlling >> of the same time you do not listen to the state plan she went forward and said were going to have a federal plane and that is it for all the state plans are pretty much neutered, correct? >> know, we absolutely listen to the state plans as a former state regulator i understand the process extremely well. i solve a lot of colleague serving as state secretary. listen, the bottom line is the federal government has an obligation to exercise a duty to control pollution.

sometimes pollution does not understand boundaries. they are polluting neighboring states to avoid litigation from the states who've done what they said they're going to do we have an obligation to make sure we protect the states. >> us of is a big challenge in the courts your ability are actually right to do that. let me ask you, i get so frustrated right now our power mix is 60% fossil fuel, 16% coal, 43% natural gas, 18% nuclear, 20% renewable. the plan that you put out clean power plan that will basically make every coal plant extinct because nobody's going to be able to afford to do that audit aging coal plants. so this will be gone. that'll be in the 2030s and nobody will build a new one unless they only run under 40% because they are not going to be able to meet the demands. do you know that cce u.s.

requirement they put into that bill, or is that plan? >> i think i'm going to push back on the notion that this rule is going after coal. i think when we talk to these utility ceos they provided to us their plans. some coal plants were already going to send that because they transition to natural gas. some of these coal plants we do believe will be able to take advantage of this technology. >> is anyone doing that now? >> the answer is no. >> north dakota spent of the governor and wyoming. there are utilities putting on this technology and beginning to use it. they're also taking full advantage of the resource provided by the bush reduction act tax codes by the inflation reduction act to invest in this very technology. so, our timeline it doesn't match with the resources currently going to utilities who

are investing. >> here's another problem. we had a pipeline at west virginia natural gas pipeline that goes down towards north carolina. we all that we went through to get the completion of that prayer we had to have a presidential signature to get that completed after it a bit in and out of the courts for years. it's like triple the cost that originally was. how in the world can you say were going to do at ccs, we are going to build pipelines that are going to carry carbon? that is not going to happen. >> the countries arty doing it. the countries doing it for other sectors of the economy. and here is for the whole of government >> i would love for you to give me interstate pipeline that has been recently built that carries carbon. that'll be quiet about it. >> is a pipeline currently being built from through north dakota to iowa. >> what was it permitted question because i have to get you those details for. >> yes a long time ago. i'm going to stop here.

>> thank you. before i recognize senator stabenow i'm going as soon as consent for the record materials describing forthcoming carbon capture projects across our nation demonstrating the administration policies and deployment of carbon capture systems to the power plant emissions. and just last month i'm told west virginia regulators approved the largest gas power plants with carbon capture and our nation. generally millions of dollars of benefits for the surrounding communities. center at seven not welcome this morning for. >> thank you very much mr. chairman and ranking member. thank you so much for holding the hearing. it is wonderful to see you administrator again. i want to thank you for being here and the work you put into developing epa fiscal year 2025 budget. i have to say from my perspective at michigan when i look at this budget i see a

commitment to a lot of long-standing priorities of mine. and the people i it represents. i want to thank you for that. i see increased investment in a water infrastructure including vital funding to replace lead pipes address emerging contaminants. the impacts of which michiganders knelt far too well. certainly you don't have to go any further than flint, michigan. we understand the critical nature of health and safety and what needs to be done. the recognition of the impact of the climate crisis and emphasis on ensuring our communities have the resources to address and adapt to new climate realities. as the state robust voting for our great lakes. including for the great lakes restoration initiative program i a programi offered back in 2010w it serves as a most important till we have to restore and

protect our great lakes. i am so appreciative this committee reauthorized our bipartisan bill to extend the great lakes restoration initiative this is very, very important i do what to say that one of the things that brings the climate crisis home to us in michigan is the great lakes are now warming faster than the oceans. and lake superior, our largest deepest gorgeous northern lake is now one of the five fastest warming lakes in the world. we never could swim in lake superior and now you can. which may sound great, but it is not great actually. so thank you for all that work. let me first also asked question about light-duty vehicle emissions. eps commitment to engaging with

our automakers. and autoworkers and thank you very much for listening, working with them and developing an ambitious but achievable final rule for a light in medium duty vehicle admissions. if arty said michigan automakers of the best in the world. there is no question about it. i'm glad epa took their inputs into account when developing the rules so they have the capacity to continue to lead. so moving forward, do i have your commitment to continue working with our automakers and autoworkers on the rules that impact them for the future? >> absolutely pray thank you for your leadership in helping us to establish some of those relationships to keep that conversation going. aptly commit to work with automakers and with the unions they're supporting the automakers. >> thank you very much. let me go on to another strong passion of mine wishes eat 15 in

our biofuels industry. to thank the epa for issuing an emergency fuel waiver to allow e- 15 gasoline, gas a blend with 50% ethanol to be sold in the upcoming summer months. can you speak to how enabling the year-round sale of eat 15 as you have permitted and both 2022 and 2023, two similar waivers could help protect consumers against fuel supply shocks by reducing reliance on imported fuel. and as we look ahead, what will be the impact of epa's recent final rule related to state waivers? >> this is another opportunity for me too thank you and your staff are helping us to navigate what was contentious but ended

up being a great situation. yes, we did issue the emergency waiver summer of 2024. as we've done in 2022 and 2023 to ensure our domestic producers can't compete on the biofuel side. but also to begin to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. we have worked on satisfying the waiver request for eight states. fiscal year 2025 and beyond those waivers will be permanent for those states to use e- 15 throughout the seminars. that gives eight states a level of certainty for future investments biofuel so we can kid needs to keep our prices low but keep globally competitive. >> this brings up ep w of the coming together of issues to lower price for consumer. dress and cleaner environment but also jobs, a lot of jobs

particularly rule america through our bio economy so appreciate you work with us on that. thank you, mr. chairman for. >> thank you. senator stabenow was a number of passes my colleagues know. one of those is chairman of agriculture coming on behalf of all of us a big thank you for making sure legislation dealing with degenerative agriculture focuses on agricultural policies with a variety of other things. the ways that would enable the farmers in this country to actually do good things for our plan at the same time in that at model provides more money for them in the pockets of the end of the day is called the generative agriculture and we applaud your support for that policies. thank you so much. >> quickly fellow brother quickly with that. and thank senator for at least a vessel but let's get a farm built on before you retire, please of get that done.

okay good, thank you. we need production agriculture to feed a hungry world. i'm going to pass now and go right to where you left off. first of all the pie plate yo are referring to from iowa to north dakota is designed to take co2 capture trip ethanol plants from the corn belt they get to north dakota geology which is suitable for carbon capture and storage and has oil recovery would not want more of that? it is not yet permit i don't know that it's finishing any of the states. we will see if that happens. secondly what is interesting to me as you referenced in the rule in carbon capture storage as a prescription for meat and the standard for power plants.

you had 90% referenced earlier which is in that rule has never been achieved. one of the things about admission standards requires adequately demonstrated the illustration used is a fast power plants that has carbon capture on it. it captures after years of fine-tuning 65 -- 70%. it looks to me that 90% is a set up for failure the goal is to shut down cold to go after coal. when you prescribe a solution is not adequately demonstrated it looks to me i can impossibility by design. the second thing i would say the supreme court was very clear in the west virginia case you cannot prescribe outside the fence line. it seems if co2 which has to be piped to g a lot of difficult formations able to take the co2

could be hundreds of miles away that is by definition outside the fence line. how do you have a durable rule in the face of a supreme court decision and have to stay within the fence line? >> on that latter point the supreme court indicated that you cannot take credit for actions that are occurring outside of the pipeline or the defense when excuse me. you look at this technology that will be on site of the facility it is the facility that is reducing those emissions are folks look very carefully i just want to say we are not attempting to be cute or step outside the supreme court ruling. not having programs designed to try to get reductions outside and get credits from outside. that fence line we are fully focused on technology the performs on the facility themselves. >> of the disposal of co2 is different than solving the admissions issue that will be debatable certainly would be

litigated i would hate to see millions and millions of more federal dollars and dollars to turn back the epa when they are stepping outside not just the fence line right outside their authority which is what i believed to be the situation. i actually have another question about whether this is even productive? particularly 2.0. the rules set where i think is an arbitrary 20% annual run time limit for simple cycle natural gas plants. realizing that other than natural gas the only other fuel that's not nuclear that is 24/7 is cold. so the only way to backup unreliable intermittent energy sources like wind or solar is to have these natural gas turbines if they can all be run 20% of the time before you threshold of rulemaking that is prohibitive

financially, everett utilities going to have to have simple cycle gas plants to backup the unreliable energy the clean energy i do not see that as a cost savings. that's like unnecessary redundant investment. has anyone considered this might be counterproductive? works we looked at that. the way you are describing it and this rule applies to future natural gas which is why we set aside existing we wanted to avoid a problem you just laid out for existing sources. we look at future natural gas plants in our conversations with the industry for those building the future and gas plants they are looking at the simple they also that ccs option. these are direct results from conversations we have had with the many in the industry. what i would point to that i think is a rub is not if we should do with the time frames associated with it.

the desire to pursue the technology is no way to do this in looking at the transition. we've had a lot of very positive conversations with the industry. i think when you get into is it too stringent on the percentages or looking at a time line that is where the real heart of the debate is. i get a little bit nervous when people attempt to undermine what is happening in wyoming or north dakota, places were proven out about the ceo early this week there are investment significant investments going into carbon capture storage. right now they're levering tax credits on the inflation reduction act we are more over time and stringency not whether we should do this quickly final rule is pretty prescriptive in both of those things and quite honestly, going back which i said is going to cross over and i promise i will wrap up here probably come back. all of this looks to me like we are having very quickly, very

quickly in the transition to note fossil fuels and i am just thinking maybe it would be a good idea to have an experiment let's turn off all fossil fuel for a week and see how it goes. i have a feeling while you and i are long gone after all this kicks in that's the reality some people are going to have to deal with economically, competitively it's not going to make us more competitive in the global marketplace. we need to be more realistic will get through the round a little bit. >> thank you, senator for those questions. welcome. >> administrator at reagan, welcome, nice to have you here. i want to do with one aspect of the infrastructure initiatives that we have that deals with affordability to consumers and have debate water bills today about one out of every three consumers are challenged on affordability of water. working with senator wicker we

include a rural low income water assistance pilot program in the legislation we passed it. the challenge is that it is not funded because we need to have the report from the epa as the basis to moving forward with this. the program, which was passed has a sunset of 2026. if we do not get started soon it will be over before we can get started. so, can you just tell me where we are in regard to the study under the epa whether we can anticipate having that report in a timely way so congress can consider finding the pilot program in order to get the started? >> absolutely, senator think if your leadership and focusing on the spirit of the partnership with your staff and senator wicker staff. the bottom line is will have done this and we understand the urgency of the time frame will have the report to congress by the summer for. >> thank you glad you have a

specific time. want to make one other point on this. local authorities that are responsible for setting mortar rates, the rate payers are stressed alternative sources are helpful but not enough to deal with the issue so affordability is becoming more and more urgent with her aging infrastructure. i am pleased to see will have that report the summer but i hope it will be in time for us to act on the appropriation cycle. let me move on to chesapeake bay. arley goes by that i don't mention the chesapeake bay would to thank my colleagues for their support we've increased authorization for the chesapeake bay program of the resources in the chesapeake bay program or under senator stabenow's leadership we've gotten help under department of agriculture pruitt who got help from other of our programs. there is a committee that you'd youchairs not been reconstituted

recently. which is coordinates the federal agencies. the federal leadership committee. i understand and conversations with senator ben holland we have both expressed to you the advisability of reconstituting that committee with your leadership as chair. considering we are reaching 2025 which is the next plateau on the commitments made by the states for what they can do and reducing the challenges in the bay enforced by tmv ills. so, can you just assure us that will beat reconstituted or reinstated to coordinate the work of the various federal agencies? >> absolutely. thank you for your leadership on getting historic investments to the chesapeake bay. we have been digesting all these historic investments in getting our stuff together. we are going to have that

leading reconstituted that group are constituted for fall meeting. we see it as a huge opportunity to get all the executives around the table and be sure that we are pursuing those goals that you and others would like us to pursue. >> okay the summer for affordability of the fall for the leadership coordinating committee. let's see if i get something for the winter done. how are we doing on lead pipe that was a major part of the biden initiative and the infrastructure package. baltimore has significant problems today the public schools are not connected because the connecting pipes can you give us a progress report on how we are dealing with the remedial issues concerning the lead pipes? >> to date $9 billion in federal funding available.

the president announced in the $3 billion recently. this year marilyn sh get 30 million of that. these are transforming committees all across the country. especially cities like baltimore. maybe 225 lead service lines that distance 2021. it's a huge shot in the army appreciate those resources. >> it's a very, very high priority for us with older cities. particularly the connectors between the main lines and that users in public facilities such as schools.

less burdensome but the co2 standard of 85 grams per mile in 2032 is the same as what you originally proposed. this is an average reduction of ten to 12% a year. how many current gas diesel into traditional hybrid vehicles make

the standard today? >> it's based on projections they are making themselves. i don't know how many to date. i just know the automobile association and others supported the rule when you say that goal looks similar because what the automobile industry gave to us through the comment period if you look at the penetration of plug-in hybrids that exceeded what we budgeted for and for that gap in terms of what people anticipated the percentage to be. be. >> there aren't any gas diesel or hybrids meeting the 85 grams

per mile today is that accurate? i think that's an appropriate caveat. >> of the communities in my state 27-one the number out there and of the renewable energy laboratory estimates 1.1 million will be needed to

support the goal do you know where we are on this? >> we are moving forward. it was designed in coordination with both of the investments in the department of energy from the infrastructure law and inflation reduction act but also with the metrics and data provided by the automobile industry so when you look at the rule and at the time frame and level of stringency one of the reasons they supported this rule is they believe that it's achievable and that coincides with where the investments will be in 2022. >> you talk a lot about the manufacturers. as part of the conversation what happens to the price of used vehicles if it goes for 33,000

33,000the family spends 12,000 e cost part of this conversation when you're talking to automakers? >> we take into consideration a lot of things and affordability is one. we took to heart what they were telling us about the vehicles if so what we see is a cost savings from maintenance and durability. we talked about all of the new vehicles moving forward.

>> i think my time is blinking here. did i run out of time? did i break the timer? i hope we get a second round of questions. >> good to see you again. i want to start by talking about air quality. in the phoenix metro area we are seeing the concentrations increase this is happening is the phoenix area is becoming one of the largest manufacturing hubs in the country of microchips and electric vehicles the project is not only create a great paying jobs but they are the type of investment to combat climate change

the administrator provided me and my staff with some commitments to making progress on the rules to afford to move i've been it's been a few months since his visit so i want to ask for an update. after the administrator visited arizona, epa region nine provided maricopa county with a commitment to conditionally approve rule 205 if the county committed to make some minor technical changes and they sent a letter to the region confirming that they would make all of the required technical changes. that means the next step is for the epa to conditionally approve. so can you confirm epa region

nine will move forward with providing congressional approval for rule 205? >> yes absolutely. >> and when will they be able to grant this approval? >> we anticipate being able to do that this summer. >> can you confirm that they will work closely with maricopa county to ensure that final approval is granted to rule 205 within the next year? >> yes. >> and in 204, which i will note was submitted back in 2019 to date no action has been taken but during their visit, the assistant administrator committed that after we got approval on 205, we then turn

our attention to 204. will you commit they work with maricopa county to decide whether to zero four can be approved and if not, identify with the changes are needed to make it approvable. >> we can absolutely do that. we will be shifting all of the resources to get that done in a timely fashion. >> thank you. as you may know epa issued a finding of failure to submit a state implementation plan for the nonattainment last year. we now face a deadline to submit however because of how long it's taken for 205 to be approved, we may have to submit very close to the deadline and i understand it

can take time between when it is submitted and when it's considered received. we don't want arizona to be penalized for passing the august deadline because of an epa paperwork processing delay. will you commit as soon as the state of arizona submits it's been received so sanctions are not imposed on arizona. >> as a matter of fact the staff talking with the state anticipate getting that late june and early july so we believe we are on track could i have one more minute? >> i also want to ask about some exceptional rules and i understand they established the quality standard for a particular matter earlier this

year. you committed to putting out updated tools to help the managers accept demonstrations for days in particular between 2016, 2015 and 2019, the maricopa association of government submitted documentation for 33 days where the image and succeeded legal limits because of wildfire smoke but to date evaluated the documentation for 19 and they granted the exemption the failure to quickly review the demonstration submitted sit difficult for the region to develop a plan to get into attainment. can you explain how the new exceptional event tools for

wildfires and i'm going to ask this for the record can you submit for the record how the new tools the epa committed to as a part of the agencies and easily submitting demonstrations? >> thank you. >> we will be submitting a variety of questions for the record and that is one of them that will be included. >> thank you chairman and administrator. you are hard not to like. i just don't like the agency you work for. >> i think that is a complement. >> it's as close as a compliment as you're going to get. >> i mean, that sincerely. i get the role but it seems they constantly look back at the laws that were passed in the clean

water act and clean air act and continue to rewrite them and go after the industry over and over again and not understanding the add costs or what it does. you take the economic impact. asking about the vehicles i did some quick research on it but you talk about trying to have better fuel efficiency but the role and it runs the gas mileage down and is worse for the environment. you see the stuff all over the floor you can remove it from a truck that is illegal. i understand that. you can take it off of a truck and increase gas mileage by 30, 40, sometimes 50%. but you don't take that into consideration but you still continue to push that and now

the farm industry we see the protein price going through the roof and it continues to climb and we have a hard time finding enough markets to go through right now. we have meatpackers that are pretty consolidated for the processing plants and we see by your own admittance you said that this is going to cause some plants to close when you see it

is spiking at higher prices than we have seen how is this positive for the consumer and for the epa to be making this move right now? >> we haven't finalized the rule and we've taken a look at what we are seeing in terms of these discharges to eliminate some of the negative environmental impacts. but as we look at the -- >> have they done a tremendous job on changing a lot? they've gone a long way where they are at a 50 years ago to where they are today and yet it's still kind of not good enough. >> when we look at the standards we do have people and a majority in the industry are performing and doing well so we want to create that level playing field

for those that are not taking additional investments. >> why wouldn't you just work with those individuals by themselves rather than make it a new rule and affect the entire industry? this is going to add a tremendous amount of cost to every dinner plate and breakfast plate and sandwich served. because of the minimum wage increase where a hamburger at mcdonald's is not going to be affordable is it so funny now? this is going to add cost. you know it at this is going to add a tremendous amount of cost when you can just work with a few of those bad apples rather than changing the entire industry on how they are discharging right now. the industry is moving forward.

by law we have to update our standards that match with where the industry is going. >> meeting the standards today and moving the goalpost again. >> many of them are executing. >> great. why are you moving the goalpost and see the need to move the goalpost because you know there's no way you can deny this this is going to add cost to protein. is it or is it not? >> we haven't finalized it so i don't know the answer to that. >> is it going to cost to them to spend millions of dollars? the answer to that is yes. >> we have to look at the benefits. there's a lot of people benefiting from the industry moving forward are these the

same industries that are going to lose the largest employer in the community because they can't afford to make the changes? we are talking about the people that live in these communities that we recognize work in the facilities and also drinking the water and breathing the air. we want to balance those with the jobs in economics and many industries as you pointed out or doing it the right way. how do you explain this to the people struggling to put protein on the plates for their kids as they speak or knowing that this is going to add cost you know this is going to add cost to

protein. how can you say this is a positive mood for the country? >> what i would tell them as we have a farming and ranching federal advisory committee and agricultural office advising specifically on the impacts none of the advisories are doing that. they are the professionals at work in colleges and universities that if a have a tremendous amount of theory. >> i will challenge you on that and provide the details for those that are farming and ranching on the committee. >> and i will recognize you for another round. good to see you, administrator. i like you. [laughter] and i love your agency.

the time of the gentleman is expired. >> six years after the agency was created so served in congress for 90% of the life expectancy of the epa and i know how much longer life expectancy is because of the epa and that is a big benefit for our society. mr. administrator, congratulations on making the greenhouse reduction fund awards for the clean financing i knew this would be a transformational program. if done right and you did it right and i'm leaving in an appropriations letter to fight for your request for oversight as well the claimant bank money

is out the door and it's ready to bring power owned by communities into the grid, help working families cut their bills and leverage new private dollars into projects that will do good for the public. is that a priority for the agency going forward to make sure that it's up and running this year? >> absolutely is. thank you for your leadership and dedication. we were glad to get it done and loved doing a visit with you in boston. but i feel really good about the program. we consulted outside, inside. we knew that it would pull billions of private sector capital off the sidelines so yes it's the prayer ready we want the oversight we are asking for the oversight because we know we have a solid program so we appreciate your support on that.

>> we are late but still long time to make a big difference. early this year the environmental protection agency finalized the rule that will help us accelerate towards our climate targets and put the brakes on drivers dependence on pricey fossil fuels and i think my colleague for talking about the importance of investing in chargers and i would love to work with you on that so people have confidence with of this anxiety that plays a role and of the rule that has been promulgated is estimated to avoid more than 7 billion metric tons of carbon pollution equivalent to four times the annual emissions from the entire transportation sector making this the single most significant

climate rule in u.s. and world history. so in addition to the claimant benefits, is this regulation going to cut costs for the american drivers as well? >> thank you for the question. it's proven that it will cut cost over the duration of the regulation. i think i want to just say not just me, the car companies are running $7 million super bowl ads to the constituent future if hybrid and electric. what we've done is put together a regulation that coincides with where technology into the market is going so it's not only for the environment but the economy and it will be good for people's pockets. >> and again it's projected to prevent 25,000 premature deaths. a big benefit. and also save $6,000 for the lifetime of the vehicle. last year epa selected 16

technical assistance centers to provide technical support and grant writing assistance to disadvantaged communities and grassroots organizations interested in the inflation reduction act, historic funding opportunities and while the centers were set up across the country, region one which serves massachusetts, rhode island, still does not have an office in the region. for a center that can partner with massachusetts environmental justice groups stood up in region one by the end of this year. we can commit to setting up the technical assistance resource

region one. >> administrator, is the recently announced environmental justice clearinghouse another tool that community organizations can use to understand from the inflation reduction act? >> absolutely this is a multiagency tool that we put in place that speaks to not just the grant opportunities and epa but the multiple grant opportunities that span the entire administration, and this is sort of the fingertip way of getting information on technical assistance and funding opportunities as well as screening and mapping tools to ensure the grants that submitted are competitive. >> it comes to the power plant regulations and hydrogen of a very different tune of what we heard when working on the

inflation reduction act and i'm glad we have seen the new rules and i urge utility lobbyists to figure out what hymnal they are singing from fd hydrogen are off the table i would be happy to help my colleagues find a better use for the billions in subsidies and support but i'm glad the administration and if you are moving forth with those proposals. they are taking advantage of tax credits and resources and we should ensure that there is a future for those specific technologies. >> they are interested and enthusiastic. >> the tension points that are happening are based on timing and percentages, not whether we pursue it and how we do it.

>> thanks for joining us and for your good work on a number of these issues given your background in state government to lead with policies grounded in reality is and in the states and maintain a healthy perspective of the hard-working american families who work under the rules and regulations, but that hasn't happened. people in wyoming are struggling with rising prices in every area of their lives. with what the policy scriptures do and what we need from the epa under this administration a torrent of regulation that you know will be to scarcity and higher costs because you are stripping baseload energy so let's start b with a clean power plant to point out which forces

call and gas-fired plants to close down if they don't spend t billions of dollars on realistic targets. these metrics are not achievable. facts and rational arguments have been presented be a but they are robust. for this administration, ideology means that all costs. the cost will be great they account for the present of our nation's electricity time went are going to be resuming work electricity. time at the time when cloud computing to fuel the current energy needs wyoming and the nation are global leaders in clean energy.

so it's absolutely surreal to see the epa the state energy production even if energy demand has increased for more data centers, artificial intelligence and your own epa or excuse me ev mandates. the supreme court ruled against the epa for overstepping its authority on the first clean power plant and rightfully so because congress did not grant to the epa sweeping authority to regulate the nation's generation and uses of electricity. so last i checked they destroyed livelihoods, annihilated jobs and wrecked the economy and evidently, that is your agenda. you said so yourself. stating, and i'm quoting, when you get an expedited facility retirement, that's the best tool

for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions. i joined many of my colleagues in anticipation that this attack on energy by the supreme court. now that uta also just finalize rules of the transition to electric vehicles. it isve astonishing that the federal government is telling americans what kind of vehicles to drive and something that does not workut outside of major urbn areas. you have exceeded. congress did not direct you to demand electric vehicles. wyoming is a rural state of 100 square miles with famously harsh weather. people in a wyoming frequently drive long distances. my ranch and my farm or 400

miles apart and yet they are still in wyoming. their lives depend on affordable reliable vehicles and that means a gas or diesel powered car or truck or natural gas. the average ev is over $10,000 more expensive than the average gas powered car. and they don't work when it is not cold and they don't work when there are no charging stations. americans don't want dvds. around six or 7%. dealerships are saying to pump the brakes on electric vehicles. for the good of the country, pull the plug on this mandate. all of us value the spirit from

the f beginning and leaves innocent parties vulnerable for the liabilities. i will tell you, justice and fairness to take that we see a clearcase approach. the financial burden on receivers like water utilities, industry and people who did not create this. he would force rural water providers and they are already feeling the squeeze from the economy of the federal mandate. i urge you for the real world individual to feel the impacts of these regulations by any reasonable standard for constitutional representative government go too far.

mr. chairman, i yield back. thank you. >> not much to yield back. [laughter] >> a lot of young people in the audience today. it. is great to see all of them. they have probably the biggest stake. good jobs to support themselves and their families. we welcome all of you. welcome. it is great to see you. >> what timeframe can you credit to for the existing part of the power -- power plant rule? >> we are working on that process right now. starting that formal process. we will move as quickly as

possible. >> have you come to any endpoint at all? >> providing you with how the process is going to be designed. >> regulating methane emissions. we are going to move as quickly as possible. >> can you commit to any endpoint at all? >> it is too early for me to throw out a date. i will go to date that is grounded in the facts of how the process is designed and going. we have given you authority for methane emissions. required in the law that you use , i'm quoting the law here, empirical data. which means that you are supposed to actually measure it. correct? >> yes spirit historically under

estimating methane leakage from the fossil fuel sector. >> i think most have underestimated. >> the epa for sure has. >> they did so because it relied on industry reporting in order to come to its numbers. correct? >> i think industry reporting informed that, yes. >> and the result was underreporting. in 2018 which is five plus years ago, they first reported that epa methane numbers were too low pdf reported likely methane leak numbers that were 60% higher than h your inventory numbers. two years later penn state reported further as signs develop and methane leaks were two times higher than epa was

relying on. stanford last year has put out its own research showing that methane was three times higher than epa has been relying on. what is the status of the epa satellitean data. do you have access to satellite data for methane leaks? >> we have started a process to acquire. we are leveraging from some of our sister agencies. >> when you think you will have actual access to satellite data? >> i will have to get back toin you on that timeline. as we have used, we have put out

this call for competitions to look at the best technologies. you will see that satellite data is specified as something we want to consider in our acquisition along with our federal family to make sure we are working with the same numbers. >> putting up a good flag for further inquiry about methane leaks that you can do for on ground measuring. >> deploying for something else. holding t investigative methods. >> we are looking at all the options above. >> there is a point where doing it has to begin. >> i think there were a number of years where the agency was prevented from pursuing the pursuit of climate change gases. with the resources you have

appropriated since 2021 and under this administration i would say we have moved as aggressively as we possibly can and will continue to do so. >> on the enforcement side, some time ago, the administration announced that it was putting together a methane task force which is a proposition that makes a lot of sense. if you have satellite data that point thatt methane leak and allows for further investigative methods to be deployed orimply pursue it on that basis, you may want to be talking to the department of justice about what their capabilities are with respect to enforcement. talking to the department of interior about what they can do to push those leaks. what is your view right now of

that methane task force, how often it meets, how often your team needs with these people whether there is an actual war room type of set up for the task force to be operating through and that kind of way. >> when the president stepped out in 2021 and cited methane in the methane pledge priorities, all of w the agencies have been working on this. when we look at the methane regulation this agency has ever finalized, that set the new bar for one of the ways we could enforce these actions. there is a constant conversation with the department of justice on looking at how we enforce our regulations . with interior as well as doe and others, we have received resources from the inflation reduction act. when you look at those acts, use

the data in technology, trying to make sure we are using all this together. it does take coordination. the development and these grant programs is being done in concert with not just doj, but doe and interior and others as well. >> my time has expired. >> thank you for those questions before ia recognize you, senato, let me ask unanimous consent for the former president on the strength of the united states economy. according to that data over 15 million jobs have been created since you took office. that is more than the populations of delaware, kansas, nebraska, new mexico, new hampshire, oklahoma and west virginia combined. with today's unemployment rate under 4% the u.s. ties a record

for the longest record set in the late 1960s. it has been under 4% now for over 27 months in a row.. inflation at 4% for more than two years and it has fallen by 10 percentage points since its height of 2021. i have a friend that as compared to what end he will say compared to what. compared to what those are some pretty good numbers. thank you for joining us. you are recognized. >> thank you, mr. chair.ed let's start by thanking you and your staff at the epa for your collaboration. not just with my office but a lot of state and local leaders on the many pressing chemical cleanup, clean water and clean air challenges that we face in california.

you know from our discussions in our many letters to the agency that have been consistently focus on how to reduce emissions especially across the transportation and would movement sectors we are so grateful for the recent rule makings on light duty and heavy duty vehicles. i understand they have gotten the attention of some of my colleagues in the committee on the other side of the aisle. i want to ask you, mr. administrator, take a moment to reaffirm not just for me but my friends on the other side of the aisle that the final rules for light and heavy duty vehicles do not in fact the unconventional combustion engines, they absolutely don't. >> thank you. clear, concise. can you now spend a minute or two and emphasize the benefits of these roles to communities across the country, not just those in california but across the country and the people that

live in these. >> we know that there are 72 million americans that live along these corridors that are disproportionately impacted by these emissions, especially from our heavy duty vehicles. the final standards providing over $13 billion in annual benefits to so society. there are a lot of people that will be breathing cleaner air and living a healthier life because of these rules. i think we have done it in a way where we look at the technology. it is not just us. the automobile industry is running super bowl ads talking about the benefits of these technologies. we have aligned our regulations with where technology and the market is going and if we do not do it we will be able hold into china. we need to have these rules in place and we need a manufacturer of these components domestically

>> thank you. just to -underscore statistic you said 72 million americans live along these core doors. that is 20% of the national population. idea, policy that can approve e the lives health well-being of one in five americans is hugely consequential. now, in addition to all of that, i know and i know you know we cannot stop with cars and trucks given the pollution stemming from this system. california sports as busy as they are and as successful as they are moved a good step you will not just the local and regional but truly our national economy. california communities that bear the burden of the poor air quality and harmful climate impacts that come with goods movement.

that is why i have consistently called ona the epa to do more to reduce emissions from locomotives and ships and planes and offloading equipment as well the epa and the administration do deserve a lot of credit forhe launching two efforts just this past month and a half to do just that. launching a zero emission freight corridor strategy to help guide the deployment of zero emission infrastructure along freight highways and followed up by sending a national zero emissions freight sector. a national strategy encompassing the whole sector including heavy duty vehicles ships trains and more will help significantly reduce these harmful impacts on air quality, climate change and public health while improving american economic competitiveness and accelerated job creation. we've seen it happen in california. mr. administrator, can you

describe what the next steps are that the epa plans to take to implement both the freight corridor funding strategy and the national goal of achieving a zero emission freight sector. >> i will say, you know, this is a very important topic. i have spent time in georgia, new jersey, california just visiting with these ports. this strategy is so important. it is important that we are working together with the consolidated strategy. i would say in addition to that strategy, where we are with the next steps thanks to your leadership and the leadership of many in this committee, we have $3 billion in grants that we will begin to dedicate to these ports to invest in these technologies and vehicles of the like. our ports want to be globally competitive. they know the future is driven by technology. i think not only will we make

this country or keep this country globally competitive we will save a lot of lives and reduce a lot of hospital visit. >> thank you very much. we have set ambitious goals. we are setting more ambitious goals. i look forward to seeing you soon back in california. >> absolutely. >> thank you mr. chair. i just want to ask a question, a quick question. administrator, when you were the nominee of this president, you were questioned about your willingness to visit states. not just the states represented here in this committee, but those that are not represented on this committee. i asked my staff to find out how many states you visited thus far i am told that you have made, as of this week 116 visits. 238 states and between you and the deputy administrator at epa you have visited a total of 45

states. i think i speak for all of us a special thanks whether we agree with the on every single policy we are discussing today, the fact he made the time to come to her states again and again is much appreciated and acknowledged show thank you for that. i want too yield now to senator sullivan. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, by the way in terms of states visiting. i know you had a good visit last summer. we welcome you back. mr. chairman, we have a bit of a contentious exchange last week. i do want to keep working with your team, your staff and thee minority staff in this committee to work with my office on that issue we raised. have not gotten any data or anything from your team. i think that out of courtesy i

deserve that. there is a lot of people who are watching what your staff is doing in my state. when i was home over the weekend , nobody was happy about it. i will not continue that debate, but i do want your staff to come brief me on what they are up to. but, mr. administrator, i want to just touch on, you know, youy are not doing it so much, but in this committee, i need to do it. the biden administration as it relates to alaska and the so-called environment are lawless. the president two weeks ago announced that he would shut down a road which had already been approved. one of the biggest critical districts in the country. a federal law in 1980 actually mandates that that road be permitted. i can read you the language.

i'm just going to submitted. 201 b. i would like to submit it for the record. the biden administration violated that wall. the biden administration which we got done, i submitted a letter to secretary holland on may 2, 2024, i would like to submit that to the record. we got that into law to two lease sales required, mandated by the congress in a law, secretary holland just said she would order those leases, cancel them, interestingly there was a foyer work quest and even the biden omb went back to secretary holland saying where do you have the legal authority to do this, madam secretary. the biden administration is asking her, you can't do that, she is doing it and that is violating the law.

sixty-three executive orders and executive actions targeting my state. sixty-three from this administration. singularly focused on alaska. most of them hurt the indigenous population in my state. 20% of alaska is indigenous. so, it is a little rich when i keep hearing about the focus of this administration on the environmental justice help and indigenous communities when they come after my state so much and hurt the native people. i will get that mr. administrator. western virginia epa. did you read that? >> yes. >> are you a lawyer? >> no. thankfully. [laughter]

>> well, i was going to comment there not a lot of good lawyerst in the administration but i will give you pass on that. with regard to agency rules, the agency must point to a clear authorization for the power it claims. this new rule, i know it did not come from you, but do you think that that was something that the congress granted the administration authority to rewrite? >> i cannot say that i delve into this rule in our agency, but i trust my colleagues have followed the law. i do know that we have a part of the process that we feel comfortable with our part. >> i think the lawyers, the bad lawyers even need to read west virginia versus epa. a really important case. let me get to something more positive with you. i appreciate you meeting with our communities especially on contaminated lands issues.

you know the whole history there you and i have talked about it. we are working on it. we have legislation we are trying to get through this committee related to indian tribes in arizona lower 48 and alaska. we want to authorize the army court to enter into an agreement with indian tribes and alaska natives for the purposes of compensatory mitigation for a permitted activity under the 404 tprogram. i know it came up in the roundtable that we had. can you work with me and senator kelly on that? >> we would be happy to provide technical assistance and work with congress on that, yes. >> kind of same category, categorical exclusion from the lands program. that comes underneath the review

i can submit that for the record in more detail. >> led us dig into that. i would love for our staff to talk through that. >> there was a significant amount of money on the contaminated lands cleanup. i will ask you because i want to be respectful here, for the record what other resources or authorities does the epa need to help clean up these native lands they got the land from the feds, 44 million acres in the biggest land settlement for native people probably in the history of the world. and a lot of it was contaminated we work together, the chairman and i to say, well, at least it does not apply, these alaska native groups cannot be liable since they were given native land. cleaning up the native lands

that aremu contaminated and alaa , it is a top priority of mine. i know you learned a lot about this when you were in alaska. i really appreciate you taking the time to meet with the different native groups that were impacted and, you know, do they do diligence on this really unjust situation. >> we will recognize senator federman. >> thank you for hosting that meeting. i think you and i in the senator announced $150 million going toward some of this cleanup. there is n more that we can tapn both bill and ira. >> i will submit those for the record more detailed answers. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator federman, welcome. >> thank you. thank you for the opportunity to talk with an expert on all of this. i am in pennsylvania.

some people across the nation really don't know what a brownfield is spirit a brownfield, given exact definition. these arere sites that have been contaminated that are qualified for programs where we can clean these brownfield's out. whether they are abandoned warehouses or gas stations that are blights in our communities and we can turn them into economic engines. >> absolutely. sometimes they can be smaller or they canft be really large. a couple hundred acres and everything. i am in western pennsylvania and i'veit literally live and am surrounded by brownfield spirit at one point last century, that was the engine that really helped shape american society andpa was about half of the word steel output.

now, they were abandoned and they were left really kind of to hold the bag. the investments, the proactive kinds of investments have now allowed struggled communities to emerge from bankruptcy. i literally lived next door to one. and it is magnificent. now it is actually part of it and it will be a national historic site of steel. the last standing example of that kind of a blast furnace. those kind of investments that help the communities that created so much of an investment and output for the history of our nation, that is one of my priorities here., it is a story across all of it.

you run a very large agency. in pennsylvania it is a story across all of it. you run a very large agency. i will not throw a lot at you. i just hope the one thing to take away from that is how critical brownfield funding absolutely is. it is a lifeline for communities all of these and now without those kinds of investments the sites would not have had anything done for 30-40-50 years it has really created an amazing impact on that. if you are five minutes, that is an opportunity talk to an expert

like yourself that really means everything and it is almost kind of somewhat related to my colleague from alaska. it is land that has a lot of great value. but it needs a lot of remediation as well. and those invested in forgotten or communities that were left behind. this really is very, very critical. if there is anything that i can do to be more of an effective advocate. >> to supercharges, we have awarded over $250 million towards our brownfields program. just a great example is an pittsburgh, we worked with the state, make it property, two gas stations that we afforded to senior living. we've seen this as a huge opportunity not to leave any

communities behind. we will work with them to make sure we are working with these investments. >> i have a little bit. thirty seconds left. moore, moore and moore. thank you for those kinds of investments. i cannot possibly express how critical those a investments are to allow those communities to move forward. continuing to deteriorate and not ever be able to prosper and come into a new phase. so thank you. >> senator, thank you for joining. i know my perspective is former governor informs me in the work that i do every day and surely your experience as a former mayor. if i'm not mistaken, lieutenant governor as well. in a husband and father. i have a couple of questions that i want to ask.

after that, senator kramer may be trying to come back and join us forht second round. are you up for that? >> here we go. >> some days it may seem that way. i have a couple of questions. let me just ask. i think you recently announced the selections into eight entities to administer some $20 billion in funding from the greenhouse gas reduction fund created in the inflation. take a minute and explain to people as we talk about the greenhouse gas reduction fund, what are we talking about? >> $20 billion focused on the average american participating in the low carbon transformation whether it be an energy efficient home or investing in

these types of things. $20 billion, we worked with the department of treasury. though specially in underwriting spending some time with private equity. just to be sure as we designed this program we did it in a transparent way. if we do, can we bring hundreds of billions of dollars of private capital off the sideline i believe we have accomplished that the we created excellent competition that selected eight grantees that are responsible for leveraging that capital. we have a ton of transparency metrics built into that. it was raised earlier that we have asked for resources in this budget to continue to do so. i try to meet as frequently as possible. he has indicated there could be a usage of additional resources. we are trying to oblige that.

we wantr to be as transparent as possible so many can benefit from these investment. >> all right, thanks. let me ask a question about an implementation. we had a hearing about i think a year ago with respect to the implementation of the legislation. it has been in effect for a couple of years. it was a disappointing hearing. it was very clear that we have a lot of work to still do and part of what j we heard from the senr staff that was here to speak on the issue was the resources, human resources needed to help do the job simply were not there one of the reasons why asking for additional resources,

additional people in part to do the work that congress says needs to be done in regards to toxic control. we charge dpa with this responsibility to ensure that the epa has appropriate resources to implement as the intended question. what impacts with the fiscal year 2024 funding levels have on the program and would you please give us a sense of what they can for the agency that we receive for the full budget request as the revenue for the recently rule. >> this is one of the ones that i scratch my head on. we received small increases to

focus on 2022 and 2023. we more than doubled the number of chemical reviews that we were doing each month. we were really trying to honor the essence of what congress was trying to do. i think that with this cut we will just see slower approval of new chemistries especially those companies that want to propel the semi conductor there. it will just come up the system. we need the resources, we need the body to do so. before this revisit that you all champion, looking at a 20% rate in these reviews. requiring we do 100%. in order to keep pace with the economy moving forward, we need to review these chemicals each and every month and it does not make sense to cut that funding now. >> thank you for a that. i will yield to the senator for any questions that she has.

>> thank you. i ask you this in appropriations asking about the greenbank oversight accountability. can you give me specific details accountability mechanisms the agency is developing for these final agreements. >> first and foremost, there is a transparency aspectt of this that focuses on basic transactions underwriting. it is aligned with most banking protocol. these investments must go to recipients that can demonstrate not only a leverage of capital, but let's get specific reductions from carbon or climate pollutants. when we think about just the level of transparency and the process, it is very clear, it is very precise they are held

accountable to use the resourceg they are given to get certain reductions according to traditional banking approaches. >> i think you have 20 people that are overseeing this. >> about 20 individuals. esthey are looking specificallyt how people are enumerating carbon reduction and whether they can leverage by banking standards. >> summer term limited because that is the way i related out. responsible for designing and connecting and creating the program. we now have to do the maintenance in the implementation. some of the resources are beyond the divine -- design phase. we are very, very transparent. we have asked for resources for the inspector general's office. i see them as a partner. >> that was left out of the ira. it was put in for department of energy but not epa.

>> what we want to do is be transparent and responsible with the resources that congress has given us. >> let me ask you about the issue of tmdl in west virginia. i mentioned in my opening statement entering the agreement to impose tmdl and west virginia as a primary regulator of water quality in the state of west virginia at the west virginia department of environmental protection's -- i love these outward flow mix, i think that it is kind of humorous spirit as to why it has been kept in the dark regarding a proposed settlement that is been months in the making. the epa has apparently decided to contrast the prior without any advance notice not to amount any kind of defense to the allegations leveled in the

plaintiff's complaint. do you agree that the agency's decision is troubling? >> i absolutely disagree with keeping west virginia in the dark. the court stipulated to epa and the state of west virginia the results of that case that we contested. we have had collectively epa and west virginia since 25th need to resolve this problem yet the agency know west virginia could come to a solution. running up against the timeline that a judge has given me. what our agency did as we entered into the settlement that we are legally obligated to do and, you know, we got your letter about extending the comment. i just have to push back. i am a former state regulator. we would never do anything where we just i.c.e. out the state. that is a long time. >> they apparently disagree with that. let me go to the state regulator

thing. the states 23 states developed and you know more about the technicalities of this. the state implementation plans. twenty-one were rejected by you blanket rejected on the same day or exactly the same time when the federal implementation time came forward. did this kind of scenario ever happened to you as a state regulator somewhere else where you had a state implementation plan that was rejected in a federal one came right in on top of it. the regular way to do it saying falling short here or there. let's make adjustments instead of outright reject -- rejection. >> when you were a state regulator. >> i've never been surprised that a state plan was either at a crossroads or not meeting the expectations of the federal government. >> that is not what i am asking.

where u.s. estate regulator ever a party of having a blanket rejection like this. >> yes. during the last administration on a whole host of issues i attempted to work with the trump administration. we worked through it. >> they are not getting the option to work through it. just coming iner and telling thm the federal plan. >> the federal plan is in place until estate plan is agreed upon >> you have rejected all of the state plans. >> state regulators, getting the sense that there was any kind of discussion going on here. >> the state regulator recognized my limitations in negotiating with the federal government. i did not resubmit the same homework. >> you got a chance to resubmit have something else before a federal plan would come out on top of you. correct?

>> it depends on the timeframe we are looking at. in order to fend off litigation from other states asking for this relief for multiple years we have to use the tools that we have. it has been available for those a numberretaries for tof years. they did not get the job done. now there is a plan in place. it is not a closed door. >> well, it won't be because the courts will come in and tell you have overextended your authorities here and you have to give the states the ability to do exactly what you are saying. rework their plan so they can meet the standards that the federal government wants. thank you very much. >> you may want to -- continued this. we will rejoin by the senator. thanks for coming back. >> my pleasure, mr. chairman. thank you for allowing a second

round of questions like that. administrator, when i was doing the questioning earlier, we will follow up on the current vehicles, gas on the 2024 model year. you said you had conversations with carmakers on that. you also said we were on track with charging stations. one of the questions i also want to ask you is, i presume you do expect there to be a greater mix of plug-ino hybrids and electric vehicles to make the 85 grand rule. has your agency done any work in regards to additional power generation that will be needed? >> we have, yes. the amount of new power generation required by 2032 to meet the demand or meet the needs of how many more electric

vehicles are hybrids. >> let me provide you those statistics, those details. >> what about the transition lines. >> we have workedowul in close proximity. yes, the thorough analysis of the demand, meeting that demand, reliability, we have done a thorough analysis of how all of our rules impact those areas. we will be happy to provide those details to you and your staff. >> you don't know how much more. >> no, that is not a number i have retained. >> the power generation you are talking about also takes into consideration that you have your clean power plant two-point oh which they have talked about which will put constraints on coal plants essentially putting them out of business that your power generation plants will take into consideration all of

that. is that accurate? >> i want to be very clear. it is the power plant strategy that i've talked with the industry about over two years. yes, it takes into account the generation and the demand, the reliability and the cost. >> when you are talking about getting to that 85 grams per mile, i believe that what you model is evr charged with 100% renewable energy. is that correct? >> i will have to get back to you on that. >> do you know what state has the highest? >> i don't. >> it is iowa. >> you do not know what percentages either, do you? >> no. generated on 100% of renewable energy. >> okay. the point is, your model calls

for all tvs being charged, the 100% energy. iowa is a leading state for generating electricity from renewable energy at 60%. nebraska actually is pretty good i think we ranked number 12. where you have a lot of tvu on the west coast, the states of maryland, new jersey, delaware, connecticut and pennsylvania, all under 5% coming from renewable energy. new york, they are actually doing better. i am sorry senator markey is not here they are on the east coast. my point being is your model is a lie if you are telling the american public you are charging the eb with renewable energy, that is just not true. most states are not generating that much from renewable energy. if you're thinking your saving

carbon in your giving car manufacturers credit for having an w ev, assuming it is poweredy renewable energy, it is just not true. you have to be able to tell the american people the truth about how these models work. >> i am not accepting what you are promoting here. if you look at our power plant strategy it is not 100% renewable energy we know that strategy will, you know, electrified this country. >> i'm not talking about the power plant strategy. i'm talking about charging ev's. >> how do you power those ev's. >> if you areof assuming that te ev's are charged by renewable energy, it is actually not true. >> i can tell you that i am not making that assumption. we look at our power generation, our power sector and what that

means in terms of affordability and reliability on the grid, you overlie that and i am not aware that any of our model says ignore all of the generation from clean natural gas, from using hydrogen to electrons that tackled the grid and we will parse out and just use renewable ones. that is not the purpose of the epa. they set standards to allow for them to choose combinations of technologies to provide cleaner power. that cleaner power will fuel our cleaner vehicles. the wedge issue here is the notion that all of the electric vehicles would solely rely on renewable energy. that is the first time i have heard that. >> my time has expired here. we will follow up on this. i will not ask you to respond back to it. other cost considerations as far

as heavy electric vehicles and guardrails or wear and tear on the roads and stuff like that. i would like to know if they have model data across the analysis. mr. chairman, thank you very much for doing a second round of questions. >> i'm glad you came back. thank you. >> a bunch of young people here today. thinking here about when i was in your shoes. we did not give much of a thought. did not think much about wind either. people talk about fusion but people more confused than anything else. now, fusion is an adjective of actually happening.

it is called an advanced act. there is driving and electric vehicle. having 600,000 miles on it. it goes. so this to a guy that does yards isaiah started a little bit of economics. getting out and moving to delaware. i have studied a little more economics. i believe they are in market forces. talking about market forces. one of the reasons is it is just a suit. so much fun. good things for the environment and so forth.

it is also a lot of fun to get out and drive. we ought to keep on, keep in mind the market forces for the good. okay. last question. at least one of our colleagues from arkansas on recycling. recycling bills trying to move through the senate in the house and get signed in. we have discussed it many times on this committee there are significant issues plaguing our nation's solid waste management system. i think $275 million of funding in the bipartisan infrastructure of all for the solid waste infrastructure for recycling grant program at epa. this provides the agency with for the $5 million per year

through fiscal year 2026 to support the establishment expansion infrastructure. the funding helping to implement the national recycling strategy which was published in 2021 in addition to two subsequent strategies. here is my question. as we prepare to close out would you please describe for us the progress that epa has made thus far. the national strategy and why. continue funding from congress is necessary to achieve the goal of achieving 50% recycling rate by 2030. >> well, thank you for this. as i traveled the states and the world, the topic is one of the topics that they used. we weree excited to be working n

the national strategy. it was creating the solid waste infrastructure grants program. to date, we have selected about 164, 65 applicants. we are providing about $199 million through that. we are just seeing a lot of demand for these grants and we are actually creating a market and a demand to get more and more creative and innovative ideas whether that be waste, plastics and the like. this is a great way for us to look att this closed-loop cycle system that will benefit our economy and the environment. >> i just want to thank you for being here. i know i've been a little contentious. i have great respect for your work. i will say in your characterization of the new

clean power plant you emphasize stakeholders, stakeholders power generators. the national rural cooperatives oppose this plan. my former colleague from the house is in charge of that. they provide power to over 42 million people. 92% of people live in poverty areas. he characterizes this plan and they characterize it on behalf of their members because their membership organization. >> thank you, senator. just a pleasure and joy to be a partner with you and all of these issues. i think you and your staff. i have been given the unanimous consent request. i will not read the whole thing again. i want to modify it quickly.

including the statement on the strength of the u.s. economy. the data of 15 million jobs have been created since he took office. with today's unemployment rate. the record for the longest monthly streak set in the late 1960s under 4% for more than 27 months in a row. inflation is down by 60% since it peeked out in june of 22. lesson 4% since june of 23. three and a half percent. that would be revised request without rejection. now the closing statement if i could. we want to thank you not just for showing up today, but we want to thank you for not the

battle but having this really informative collegial and productive exchange of ideas and hopefully we helped set the stage with our opening comments and you certainly have helped as well with your thoughts and remarks. all of us realize that a leading epa has more than a few challenges and i will think you are providing the leadership to deliver on the priorities and promises that we have made to the american people. successfully protecting human health and the environment and providing the predictability for stakeholders including

businesses. with that in mind i hope that our members will join me in support of the president's budget request for epa. a little bit of housekeeping, if i could get senators will be allowed to submit requests just for the record through the close of business on wednesday may 22 that will compile those. we ask that you reply by wednesday, june 5. i just want to say, my sister and i born in the coal mining town. my dad and my uncles were in the military. served in world war ii. i spent many years in the navy during the vietnam war and after i have known a lot of service members, and women who have spouses who also served.

i have said to many spouses just as recently as this past weekend that sometimes a person that wears a uniform in the cell -- military is a person that serving. often times it is not just the person wearing the uniform that served but the spouse alongside the service members. i just say to your family thank you for being part. welcome to the family. i will say thank you to their service and their willingness to serve. i am pleased with how many states you visited, how often you visited states. you have six or seven months left for the year. knock him out. holding the record for state distance by an epa administrator

that would be a great record to hold. with that i think we are done. it is a wrap. thank you so much. we are adjourned. thank you so much. >> thank you all. .... ....

[inaudible conversations] stationscongress returns

tuesday. eastern later in the week lawmakerl vote on legislation to reauthorize faa programs for five years. cu programs are set to expire product midnight. members will consider bills requiring event ticket sellers to expose prices measures for law enforcement during national police. the senate is back at 3:00 p.m. ea senators will vote on executive judicial nominatnsor u.s. district in circuit court. watch live coverage of the house on c-span. the senate on c-snd a reminder you can watch all congressiooverage with our free go up, he spanned out or

online at c-span.org. >> c-span has provided complete coverage of the congressman the house and set of course to congressional hearings, party briefings and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruption and completely unfiltered. watch the house transportation infrastructure committee live 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, c-span free mobile video up or online at c-span.org.