Budget Hearing – Environmental Protection Agency

Commit Committee will come to order. This afternoon I'd like to welcome the seventeenth Administrator of the EPA, Lee Zeldin. Administrator Zeldin, welcome back to the committee. We are here to discuss the fiscal year twenty twenty-seven President's budget request for the Environmental Protection Agency. This administration is focused on right-sizing the EPA and returning the focus of the agency to its The agency ballooned in size in recent years in part due to one hundred billion in supplemental funding from bills outside of the annual appropriations process. The amount of supplemental funding totaled more than ten times the discretionary budget of the entire EPA. Some of this supplemental funding was fraught with waste and abuse, which is why Republicans rescinded some of it through the one big beautiful bill. We learned about this thanks to your oversight work, Administrator. Looking ahead, we must responsibly evaluate the needs and missions of the agency. This fiscal year's twenty twenty-seven budget request, similar to last year's, proposes to cut the agency. We li- we likely cannot accept the proposed steep cuts to the state and tribal assistance grants that our states, tribes and water utilities rely on for implementing federal statues statutes and providing safe and reliable drinking water and wastewater. However, I look forward to hearing more about how the budget request right sizes the agency and I'm ready for the necessary and tough deliberations about how to best res- how to best spend limited federal resources to insure the agency as protecting air, land and water resources. Many of my constituents in Idaho are also concerned about the intense regulatory overreach by prior administrations and that have made it harder for industry to thrive or sometimes even survive. Even though these very industries have made great strides in reducing their environmental footprint. I look forward to hearing more today about your efforts and the budgetary resources you need in order to reduce regulation regulatory burdens and provide certainty for our farmers and industries. Whether that's through reconsidering rule making or reviewing pesticide and chemical applications in a more timely and effective manner. Right now our focus should be on implementing common sense approaches that lower costs for everyday families and increase American competitiveness. I believe there is an appropriate balance that protects our environmental our environment while promoting economic growth and job creation, and we need both in order for America to to thrive. Thank you, Administrator Zeldin, for being here today to have this discussion with us. Now I'd like to yield to Ranking Member Pingree for her opening statement.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Administrator Zeldin. I appreciate you being here today. Over the last year I've watched the administration try to turn the EPA into an agency that prioritizes corporate polluters and fossil fuel interests over protecting the environment. EPA's fiscal year twenty twenty seven budget makes this crystal clear. It proposes proposes massive cuts to clean air, compliance and enforcement programs, and completely abandons the states. Since President Trump Trump took office, EPA employees have been under attack. The Office of Research and Development has been dismantled, and the agency has shed nearly two thousand eight hundred positions, about one fifth of its workforce. In fact, staffing is so critically low that despite the administration proposing a fifty-two percent cut to the budget, overall staffing would stay relatively flat. Instead, staffing cuts zero in on specific programs the public depends on most, specifically federal support for air quality management and enforcement. The federal sp- support for air quality management program assists states tribes and local air pollution control agencies in the development, implementation and evaluation evaluation of their air quality programs. And yet, I shouldn't be surprised that this program is cut by forty-two percent because the budget also proposes to nearly eliminate funding to states for categorical grants. This is the funding that states use to run their environmental programs. I am very sorry to say that this has become the administration's playbook. cause the damage, then tell the states to clean it up on their own. Slash the federal commitment, dump the costs back on the states, and expect them to deal with the consequences alone. The hypocrisy could not be more glaring. Just this morning I was at the Supreme Court, listening to oral arguments for an appeal by the chemical giant Bayer, formerly known as Monsanto, on the manufacture of Roundup. I'm sure you know all about it though because it was the Trump administration that supported Bayer's appeal over lawsuits that allege it failed to warn consumers about the product's dangers. As you are well aware, pesticides in the United States are regulated under a combination of federal, state, and local laws. States and local municipalities have taken steps of their own to protect the health of their communities, adopting measures to restrict pesticide spraying near schools, homes, and public spaces. Why? Because the science is clear. Children are particularly vulnerable to toxic exposure with serious risks to brain development, reproduction, and long-term health. In Maine, for example, we have more than thirty state and local regulations related to pesticide use and warning requirements. This administration supports policies that would shield chemical manufacturers from lawsuits, and would preempt state and local warning label laws, or usage regulations, for potentially harmful products. This means states and local governments would be blocked from protecting their own citizens. State and local governments are often more nimble, evaluating the best science and safety considerations. Pesticide re-evaluations at the EPA happen roughly every fifteen years, but for glyphosate the last re-registration was nineteen ninety-three. Meanwhile, your budget proposes to eliminate funding for Pesticides Enforcement, claiming that it will advance cooperative federalism by returning the responsibility to state and local entities. So, which is it? Are you only for cooperative federalism when it doesn't inconvenience the chemical companies? This administration should be protecting families, farmers and children, not doing favors for chemical giants. I sought to remove the pen- policy writer on this issue from the subcommittee's final twenty twenty six, bill and I appreciate the cooperation we were able to do that. I am now fighting to strip it from the farm bill, which we are expected to take up this week. My amendment to do this has strong bipartisan support, because this is beyond politics and party lines. The way I see it, if you really want to make America healthy again, choosing the health of Americans over corporate profits and immunity should be the easiest decision you make. I hope we can have a constructive conversation today, and I thank you very much for being here this afternoon.

Thank you, Congressman Pingree. We're uh fortunate to have the ranking member of the full appropriations committee with us today uh Rosa DeLauro and would uh yield to you for any opening statement you have.

Thank you very, very much, Mister Chairman and uh ranking member Pingree for convening the hearing today. I wanna thank Administrator Zeldin for testifying before this uh committee and uh recalling the days on which we co-chaired the Long Island Sound uh caucus, a different time. Uh, uh, dif- different environment. Uh, no pun intended here. So, uh, uh, during the twenty twenty four presidential campaign, Donald Trump hosted a dozen of fossil fuel executives and lobbyists for an event at Mar-a-Lago. At the event, he told the room that they ought to contribute one billion dollars to his election effort. And in exchange, he would slash environmental protections and make them much, much richer. He called it a quote "deal" for them, that they would make back the one billion many times over if he were elected. Judging from the past year, this appears to be one of the only promises President Trump has actually kept. He has decimated environmental protections, putting American families at greater risk of cancer, asthma, heart disease, and other ailments at the behest of wealthy corporate polluters. Under your tenure, Mister Administrator, the EPA has gone to great lengths to avoid enforcing environmental protections. At the beginning of this year, the EPA determined that it would no longer factor in the value of human life when weighing the costs and benefits of environmental regulations. Instead, they will only consider the financial impact on corporate polluters. It is hard to put a finer point on it than that. The EPA is quite literally placing the value of corporate profits above human life. The EPA has rolled back dozens of protections against pollution from tailpipe emissions, soot from smoketacks, stacks, emissions of mercury. It also weakened requirements for coal companies to clean up the toxic messes they make, allowing them to pollute our communities even more. At every opportunity, the Trump administration has chosen to put the interests of large corporations, led by wealthy executives, who want to pad their profits by polluting even more, above the in- interests of the American people who have to live in an environment they are destroying. This is nothing short of an all-out assault on the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land from which we grow our food. The Trump administration's budget request for the EPA would decimate the agency even further, preventing a future administration from undoing the damage being done to our environment. The budget request proposes cutting the EPA budget by more than fifty percent. It's the lowest level since the Reagan administration. It slashes funding for clean water and drinking water, state revolving funds, by seventy-four percent. It proposes eliminating nearly all grant funding for states which will harm poorer rural areas the most. The budget proposes an eighty-three percent cut to tribal uh uh assistance uh to the tri- state and tribal assistance grants for water infrastructure and other areas. The decades-long campaign against the validity of climate change is one of the oldest examples of large corporations and rich executives deploying their immense wealth to achieve a political goal. They do not want to forfeit even a fraction of their profits to maintain a clean and livable environment. It is exhibit A in the case against corporate influence in our politics. Unfortunately, under the Trump administration, these billionaires have gotten their money's worth and it's the American families who will suffer for it. The government has a responsibility, has a responsibility to protect the collective welfare of the people it represents. And that means ensuring there is a c- clean water to drink, fresh air to breathe. This administration has abdicated that responsibility, instead put corporate profits over people's health. I will have questions for you, Mister Administrator, on how you can possibly justify abandoning the basic responsibility your agency is tasked with. I look forward to hearing your answers. I thank the chair and I yield back.

Thank you, Ranking Ranking Member DeLauro. Uh On those happy notes, uh, Administrator Zeldin, you may proceed with your opening statement. Your official submitted testimony will be included in the record.

Well, thank you, Chairman Simpson, Ranking Member Pingree, Ranking Member DeLauro, and members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the President's fiscal year twenty twenty-seven budget request for United States Environmental Protection Agency. At the EPA, under President Trump, we strongly believe that we can both protect the environment and grow the economy. No longer is this a binary choice where we can only select one or the other. This past January, at the one year mark of President Trump's term in office, I announced five hundred top environmental wins during that first year. These actions advance our core mission of protecting human health and the environment. Included in this list is the signing of our historic agreement with the Mexican government to end the decades-long Tijuana River sewage crisis. Highlights also include completing five-year reviews for twenty-six Superfund sites across New England and announcing three billion in new funding for states to reduce lead exposure in drinking water. Additionally, less than sixty days into this administration, we launched the largest deregulatory agenda in US history. Thirty-one actions that apply common sense, unleash US energy dominance and strengthen the American economy. President Trump promised a government that actually works This administration is following through on that pledge. In my first year as administrator, I fulfilled a commitment I made during my confirmation to visit all fifty states. And I completed that effort in just nine and a half months. It was exciting to often witness in my travels, groundbreaking after groundbreaking. Because of President Trump's leadership, we've seen record-breaking investments pouring into our country. The Trump PPA is cutting costs. for American families by ending the Green New scam and rescinding the two thousand nine endangerment finding freeing the auto industry from Obama and Biden era rules that pushed costly electric vehicles without apology the agency's ending years of regulatory whiplash dismantling the unlawful crown jewel of climate activists and putting affordability ahead of alarmism This is the single largest deregulatory action in American history and lessens the federal government's harmful grip over the economy saving over one trillion dollars and bringing down the cost of new vehicles a stark contrast with our predecessors the trump administration is committed to building reliable base load power including coal which is why we rescinded the biden epa s amendment in the twenty twenty four mercury and air toxics rule having reliable base load power is vital to energy affordability and our national security Americans will see the expected six hundred and seventy million dollars in regulatory compliance cost savings in the form of lower costs of transportation, heating, utilities, farming and manufacturing and more reliable energy. EPA has also been hard at work to create a durable and clear definition of waters of the United States faithfully abiding by the Supreme Court's decision in SACIT. EPA has the responsibility to ensure federally jurisdictional water resources are protected. while setting clear and practical rules of the road that accelerate economic growth and advance cooperative federalism. Once finalized, this new definition will cut red tape and provide predictability, consistency and clarity for permitting under the Clean Water Act. Additionally, EPA political and career leadership work to reorganize the agency workforce to best support EPA's mission, fulfill our statutory obligations, protect human health and the environment, and power the great American comeback. The establishment of the new Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions allows the Trump EPA to bolster gold standard science across the agency. We are also working through the chemical backlog we inherited from the Biden administration. Our team has made significant progress getting newer, safer chemicals reviewed and old chemicals off the market. Over the last year, we've approved many of the state implementation plans the Biden administration disapproved. We know the best solutions come from Americans across the country who know their communities best. EPA is committed to working with our regional and state partners to protect national ambient air quality standards and move away from the so-called " good neighbor" plans. EPA also plays a pivotal role in making America healthy again, while we do everything in our power to ensure America's farmers have access to the resources and affordable equipment necessary to feed, clothe and fuel the world. The Trump EPA is building a foundation for future generations to thrive as the healthiest in our nation's history. That is why I recently announced alongside HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., that EPA is adding microplastics and pharmaceuticals to our contaminant candidate list for the first time ever. The President's fiscal year twenty-seven budget proposal captures significant efficiencies and a return focused on what Congress has directed us to do. Demonstrating our commitment to a leaner, more efficient and accountable EPA. Focused on environmental work that directly benefits the American people. I look forward to answering your questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Administrator Zeldin, for uh both for being here and for your opening statement. I'll start with questions. Uh, first I wanna talk just a little bit about the Rural Water Technical Assistance Grants. I wanna uh I have program for many years because it works for Idahoans and for rural communities all across the country. The EPA funding goes directly to rural water technical assistance providers that are located in communities across the country to help rural water systems comply with federal statutes to ensure safe and clean water, to evaluate systems needs, and to access funding opportunities. Prior budget requests from both Democratic and Republican administrations have eliminated funding for this program But cons- but Congress constantly uh consistently restores it. I've never understood why they eliminated the funding for it. A notice of funding availability for this program was announced on April thirteenth. Thank you uh for prioritizing getting this funding out the door. Can you confirm which fiscal year funding this notice uh these notices cover?

Uh few things there uh with with regards to the technical assistance uh program Last year we spent uh ninety-nine percent of expiring funds. With regards to rural drinking water, just this past Friday we announced that we are investing ninety million to strengthen water infrastructure for tribes and rural communities. Uh, this will go to support small, rural and tribal communities across the country, including communities that you have championed. Uh, we look forward to partnering uh with you and other members of the committee. Um, the announcement was for FY twenty-six.

OK, that's excellent.

FY twenty-six.

FY twenty-six. Thank you. We'll be following the twenty-six funding closely and we and uh we provide congressional direction for the agency to award this funding on an annual basis. Uh, on that note, can you commit to uh continuing to follow the congressional direction as it's related to this program, including selecting awardees that are the most qualified and experienced and awarding funding on this annual basis?

Yes, Chairman.

Thank you. Second question deals with community f- uh project funding. Among the top issues that my colleagues contact us about here on this interior subcommittee is the implementation of community project funding that they have secured for water and waste water projects in their district. These projects have real impacts on communities across the country, with our aging infrastructure and much of it operating on borrowed time. This funding is a way for members to provide dollars that help address pressing water and wastewater needs. The EPA initiates the process each year by publishing a guidance document for project recipients. It has been three months since the final uh FY twenty-six interior spending bill was signed into law. Can you give us an timeline on when the EPA will publish its twenty-six community project funding implementation guideline guidelines?

In in the coming weeks in the month of May.

I appreciate the work that the EPA does in delivering this community project funding to recipients across the country. The EPA communi- uh, com- communicates directly with project recipients, including with proactive outreach by hosting training and webinars, and has a web page with additional resources and application materials. I appreciate and understand that this is time intensive intensive. Uh, for the past several years, the Interior Bill has provided dedicated funding for implementation of these projects. Unfortunately, we know that a backlog still remains in getting funding for these projects out of the door. Can you commit to communicating with project recipients throughout the process that can improve the success of these projects?

Absolutely. And uh this was my first experience being on the the opposite side of uh this spending. And uh having the help of members of Congress when uh for some strange reason we're not hearing from a a recipient that has been very helpful. over the course of uh the last fifteen months. Additionally, one of the other impediments that we've noticed is that uh at times the uh congressionally directed spending is only a portion of the total project, so the recipient is waiting to secure the remainder of what's needed. Uh that's been an aspect and another aspect is uh sometimes when the request is made, uh it's based uh off well almost always it's based on what they expect the project to cost, but when costs go up. Uh, that has been a a dynamic just with a shifting um, uh, situations, uh, of recipients as far as where they are financially as well as uh what they estimate to be the cost of the project.

Well, I appreciate that. I know it's - it's, uh, challenging. Uh, there are a lot of communities, these are oftentimes very small communities that have no idea how to work with the federal government. And they will sometimes call us and say, " When are we gonna get that check?" they think we're gonna just send them a check for whatever the earmark was for the, or I guess community finance project was for this water system and stuff, and there is a process that you go through, so educating them and having your your uh uh agency educate them along with us is very helpful in that, so I appreciate it, look forward to working with you on that. Pesticide review backlog. As you know the Office of Pesticide Programs regulates the safety and availability of pesticides in this country. The number of outstanding PREA cases is the highest it's been in the last uh in at least five years. Under the most recent PREA reauthorization, EPA is required to complete a third-party workforce assessment to evaluate the workforce needs to address the backlog in pesticide application decisions. I know that you have just completed several reorganizations with the agency, including bringing staff from the Office of Research and Development directly to the program offices like the Office of Pesticide Programs. Do you think the Office of Pesticide Programs needs additional staff to address the backlog, uh, in addition to the staff you have moved from the Office of Research and Development?

Well, first off, uh, I appreciate you pointing out the - the size of, uh, the backlog. When we came in it was over fourteen thousand and the pesticide review of the new chemicals was about five hundred uh when we went through last year's reorganization we actually increased uh the amount of scientists inside of uh the Office of Chemical Safety. Um, The it's I I also I'm glad you're referencing that that analysis that was a third party report, not an EPA report, uh that was completed a a few months back. Um for for example one of the uh the areas where we were able to increase uh scientific expertise um inside the chemical program we actually only had two senior scientists, um and we now have five. Uh we have a new research division that is solely doing research which directly supports our statutory obligations for chemicals and pesticides. Uh, the the reorganization is also expanding our capabilities for advancing new approach methods, uh, which has been key in order to reduce our reliance and eliminate animal testing at the at the agency. Uh, we have been able to reduce that backlog. As I mentioned when we came in, it was over fourteen thousand. We have knocked that down by several thousand uh, and we'll continue to make progress. We want to uh advance gold standard science. We want to be uh transparent with the public. includes with our web pages and uh other announcements coming out of the uh the agency and um we uh we will be sure to uh continue to work with uh all of you if you have any questions from any of your constituents as far as uh studies that are relied upon and uh past decisions that were made future decisions um I think members of congress serve an important role with uh that effort to be transparent with the public.

I appreciate that very much and also we have the same sort of issue I stated earlier that uh your administration's made many changes to the organization and the agency is part of your efforts to right size the agency and return the focus to to its statutory requirements. The budget request states that states that the request reflects a realignment of resources and FTEs to ensure chemical reviews are done in a timely manner, addressing the deficit in staff and funding that has negative consequences for small businesses and partners. I don't see any requested funding increase for any program area that supports the Chemicals office in your budget request. Can you explain how you are addressing your stated deficit of resources?

Well, I - as I, you know, just mentioned, um, on the uh, bandwidth front, we increased in our reorganization uh, the amount of personnel, the amount of FTEs inside of the Office of Chemical Safety. Uh, that included an increase in the amount of scientists, uh, and uh, in- including uh, an effort to bring the research closer to that program office. Uh, Congress also included a seventeen million dollar investment in IT in a March, twenty twenty five uh appropriation. That's been very helpful. Um, we - we experienced uh a situation at the agency before I had got there where uh inside the chemical safety office, the software would just go down for days. Uh, things would stop across the board. Uh, your investment that Congress made, uh, in that seventeen million dollars has been used to update our, uh, IT at the agency, and that's also proved to, uh, to be very helpful.

Thank you. I'd You just answered my next question. There is one I want to ask, though. Uh, the President's budget request included one point seven million to stand up the Good Samaritan remediation of abandoned hard rock mines act, which was signed into law by twenty t- in twenty twenty four. The bill was led by one of our own subcommittee members, Miss Molloy, who wanted me to ask this cuz she couldn't be here today. I was a cosponsor of the bill and it had bri- broad bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate. The bill establishes a new EPA-led pilot program to issue permits to Good Samaritans who want to remediate abandoned hard rock mines. With the budget request proposing uh to issue five to seven permits for fiscal year twenty twenty seven, How is the EPA going to prioritize sites for permitting, and how can states work proactively with the EPA?

We are going to be starting some of these projects this year. And, uh, we plan to have all fifteen out over the course of this term. Uh, the anticipated benefits of the Good Samaritan program include removing toxic mine tailings from streams, to benefit native trout and other fish, restoring a valuable recreational resource, rerouting acid mine drainage away from mine tailings to prevent contamination of rivers, creeks and streams, which helps to preserve our resources. EPA will continue to work closely with the federal land management agencies and rely on stakeholder input to ensure a consistent and successful national program. Uh and I would uh strongly encourage uh any interested good Samaritans to reach out to our Office of Land and Emergency Management for pre-application discussions.

Thank you, Administrator. Miss Pingree?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the many important issues that you posed. Um, Mister Administrator, your EPA has spent a lot of time trying to brand itself or to talk about " make America healthy again", a slogan that I strongly support. But when I look at the actions your agency is doing, I see the opposite. It's generally prioritizing industry over public health. For instance, EPA filed a motion in court to eliminate enforceable standards for certain PFAS chemicals. It dismantled the Office of Research and Development, which will weaken the scientific backbone of the agency. The president signed an executive order aiming to increase domestic production of glyphosate the active ingredient in Roundup. Despite a court-ordered ban for the twenty twenty-five growing season, EPA reinstated the herbicide Dicamba for over-the-top use of the chemical, for genetically modified soybeans and cotton. EPA's general counsel joined the DOJ in backing Bayer's pre- uh pesticide preemption case today before the Supreme Court. And one thing that EPA is not doing, banning the use of Paraquat, which has been linked to Parkinson's disease, something former senior EPA officials across several administrations called for just last week. At the same time, the EPA is installing chemical industry insiders in key positions. The top political officer overseeing new chemicals came from the American Chemistry Council. Your new science advisory board includes representatives from Dow Chemical, Cortiva and Exxon Mobil. And of course there's your well-documented support of Bayer, as I talked about in my opening remarks, who you met last June. According to a FOIA memo, one of the discussion topics was Bayer thanking you for updating the glyphosate web page and your work on Maha. This suggests to me that the chemical companies are very involved in the work you do. So, the Maha benefits, the some of the Maha advocates that I've met with, some of who may be here today, seem deeply concerned with this administration paying lip service to the movement while delivering win after win for the chemical industry. I share their concerns. As I said, I was at the rally this morning outside the Supreme Court. I listened to many speeches. Many people seem very angry. So I just want to ask you plainly. Do you understand why Maha advocates appear to be deeply concerned by the administration's claims to support making America healthy again and those policies? At the same time the EPA is weakening Pfast protections, sidelining agency scientists, defending Bayer, and elevating chemical industry leaders within your own agency.

It's a uh really uh good um approach to put a premise of a question where there's like uh a whole bunch of inaccurate things and where do you want me to start that's like a fourteen part question

anything that you feel is inaccurate feel free go ahead

well i mean uh obviously i wouldn't expect you to go through like any of the list of our top five hundred environmental accomplishments from the first year you you don't wanna you don't wanna talk about any of it right you just wanna make believe that it just didn't happen i get it there's you know there's a midterm coming up you know

i was happy to hear you about you talking about your accomplishments but i'm deeply concerned about the gutting the budget

mmm

so do you wanna talk so you bring up Pfast you wanna go through all of our Pfast accomplishments? we go through that next we could go through these environmental accomplishments you wanna take about talk about a make America healthy again movement that you want to you want politically you're looking to meddle in obviously you didn't support President Trump the MAHA coalition did

look I can make this easier the the

these are people working with us on microplastics which we just added onto the contaminant candidate list

I'm gonna reclaim my time ok please reclaim my time

please ask your next fifteen part question

I will make it quicker

ok

I was interested Uh, it's fine. I - I - I - I'm provoking you, I understand, and I - uh, I understand why you didn't like my question. I was interested to read a letter signed by many of the MAHA advocates, and again, I didn't - I didn't invent MAHA. I'm very proud to support the EPA. It's the administration, Trump administration, who has been touting MAHA, promoting MAHA, and I've met with many advocates to see where we have areas on a bipartisan basis where we can work together. So you tell me. They sent you a letter at the end of March and they gave you a list of things that it's time for the EPA to do. Immediately initiate emergency review of pesticides banned in pure nations, close tostic toxic pesticide loopholes, shut the revolving door between the EPA and the chemical industry, rebuild the Office of Restore and Development, restore the EPA's scientific core. Do you have answers to any of those questions? Because those seem like very fair and there are many others in here of things that the EPA should be doing.

Well, listen, we - we have -

And they come from people who support the movement that you support.

OK. We - we, uh, enjoy our working relationship with Maha and that's why we have partnered on a number of different efforts. Um, you - uh, I - I just referenced adding micro-plastics and - and pharmaceuticals to the contaminated candidate list. Um, we - we, uh, need to be able to - to do our review of glyphosate, which is being done in twenty twenty-six. Uh, my message that I've communicated publicly uh on that is that uh I want our dedicated career scientists inside the Office of Chemical Safety to uh to be, uh, able to do that without any political um interference. Uh, I want the - the gold standard science, the best available science to - to dictate uh the outcomes of that particular research, and I wanna communicate that publicly. Um. I'm not gonna prejudge uh the outcome of of I'm not allowed to prejudge the outcome of that ongoing review, but we want to empower dedicated career scientists and inside that office are folks who have been there for ten twenty thirty years and they're doing an amazing fantastic job. What I have done often uh with the Office of Chemical Safety is that I will have a meeting where um I have the political uh appointees leave the room. and I have a candid discussion with those career staffers and I ask them a lot of tough questions. Uh, and ensure that I'm receiving, uh, information from, uh, the grassroots up. We talked about the RE-ORG. Uh, you like to say decimated research, I'm - wouldn't expect you to talk about the hundreds of people inside the Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions. I wouldn't expect you to reference the increased scientists inside of the Office of Chemical Safety, cuz I get it, the - you - I mean, you have an agenda, I mean, I - I understand you. like to have a gavel in your hand.

Uh, reclaiming my time, We can go. uh, yeah, just uh, I'll just say a couple more things and then I'll let you move on to the next questioner. Um, first off, we get very little communication from you about the reorganization or about what studies have been dropped or where scientists have been moved with the dismantling organization so if you wanna provide me and this committee with a higher level of, um, information than we're used to getting, I would be thrilled to learn more about where those scientists are and how many scientific studies have been dropped or changed. So please give me all the information you want." And I may well find things in there that say, " Good job, glad you're reorganizing that." And yes, I'm thrilled that you are um taking action on micro-plastics. But um, I just want to be clear that's uh out for public comment, we may not get the information on it for a while, so there's nothing that has been actively done on that. And lastly, I'm very happy for you to be talking about uh scientific study and and the re-evaluation of glyphosate. I know that's a role of the EPA and it's long overdue. But I do not understand why the agency would at the same time support immunity for the for the chemical industry and preempt the states on making their own laws, before that study has been done. So, I yield back my time, um, and I thank you for being here today.

Mr. Elvey.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Administrator. Miss Hanson, you're not forgotten, I see you sitting over there, I know you're anxiously awaiting a question, but uh we're we're grateful you're both here. Um. I'm fairly new to this subcommittee and uh so you're my first administrator, uh actually the second one, but I think you're doing a really good job and I uh, my mom lived in Imperial Beach, California for the last twenty years of her life. And she had some long difficulties and um the sewage issue down there from the Tijuana River sewage issue has been uh, in existence since nineteen thirty-three. So nearly a hundred years this problem has, uh, has been there. If you don't care about clean water, then why did you solve the problem?

The, uh, the president made it a top priority. Uh, he's, I, I've been in meetings with the president that had nothing t- at all to do with the Tijuana River sewage crisis but he saw the footage uh actually what got to him the most. uh was the footage that uh of the impacted navy seal training in Coronado um the the president has posted the the videos that had come out and he demanded action um I went there for the first time last April we then uh launched a ninety day negotiation with Mexico at the end of July we signed a memorandum of understanding uh that uh Mexico agreed to uh do several things adding a whole bunch of new Mexico side projects that were needed in order to have a one hundred percent solution to obligate money that they previously said that they would but they hadn't yet, and to also stress test timelines, uh, in order to be able to bring down the project timelines wherever possible. Uh, there was then, after that agreement was signed, us and Mexico, uh, there was then a negotiation that was finalized in December, uh, for a new minute that was agreed to between the United States and Mexico a binding agreement, uh, projects that will be completed in twenty-six, twenty-seven, and one in twenty-eight, implementing that plan is, uh, the plan to have a permanent one hundred percent solution, uh, to this decades-long crisis. So the president made it a priority. He sent me out there. Uh, we engaged in negotiation that involved different agencies. Uh, we have a signature. Mexico, over the course of the last several months, has been doing what they had committed to us that they would do. Uh, and we continue to keep a close eye daily, uh, on this important priority for millions of people in Southern California.

It's a it's an incredibly big deal and and I was working with some of our Democrat colleagues from California to get this taken care of. You did it. And and I'm really grateful for for that. It's gonna take some time to clean up, but thank you for doing what you did. It affected my mom's health, it affected our our special operator's health, and I'm just grateful for doing it. The tragic fires in Los Angeles just decimated that community. your agency participated in the cleanup. How long did it take you to do that?

Um, when President Trump was uh inaugurated, he gave us thirty days to complete our hazardous material removal. We got it done in twenty eight, uh, so that the Army Corps could come in and complete their phase two debris removal, which they completed in a hundred days. This was the largest uh, uh, wildfire cleanup in the history of the agency and we completed it in record time. Uh, the agency then uh recently over the course of last couple of months going above and beyond at the president's direction uh we've essentially been doing constituent services uh where we are calling uh all of the victims uh who have not yet gotten their permits and we are helping them working directly with the city of los angeles with the county in los angeles to help them get their permits done since we got involved in that there's been over two thousand permits that have uh been completed small business administration uh awarded three billion dollars in disaster loans that was over half of their disaster loans for uh twenty twenty five and uh the agency continues to stay involve working closely with leaders at uh all levels of government uh to make sure that we're helping these victims that's included that's including uh meetings recently with the president there was one that took place last week uh between the president and mayor bass and along on uh and los angeles county supervisor catherine barger Uh, the president has been outspoken, uh, on the insurance companies that have been dragging their feet. He's been outspoken, uh, with regards to the banks. Uh, that can be doing more as well. So this, uh, effort has been to go above and beyond. At first, the focus was on our federal equities. Um, but over the course of the last few months when the president saw there wasn't enough getting done fast enough, with non-federal logjams is that he's deployed me and, uh, others to, uh, help break through those non-federal logjams. And we're honored to do it.

Finally, uh, let's talk about pesticides. They've become the talk of the country with the Maha movement. Um, and we talk about a lot about the regulated ones in the United States. Tell me about illegal pesticides and what you've done to stop the uh those from coming from foreign countries and why.

Yeah, that's a uh a v- that's been a top priority for us and that was um a somewhat uh ramped up new effort for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance. uh to be able to tackle illegal pesticides we have pesticides that come in from out of the country uh we have pesticides that get dumped here from china uh and i gotta tell you as i've travelled around uh this country i mean i i remember visiting a farm in minnesota where i saw a whole lot of chinese letters all over their products um behind closed doors and it was pretty eye-opening for me uh to see just how much of a reliance uh is out there in these Chinese products however uh what's worse it's one thing when there's a company that sells a product that has Chinese lettering on it and has connections uh to Chinese companies and it goes through a registration process it's another thing when you're illegally dumping uh Chinese pesticides into our country not just Chinese pesticides but other countries as well uh so the uh the import enforcement uh effort has been a top priority for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance. Um, since January twenty twenty-five, EPA has presen- uh, prevented over five hundred shipments of non-compliant products from illegally entering the country, blocked over one point six million pounds of illegal pesticides imports, and charged sixty-five criminal defendants for illegal smuggling and transnational organized criminal conduct, uh, that were hurt- that was hurting Americans and American businesses. Uh, and the EPA is prepared to deliver even more results in fiscal year twenty-seven.

Thank you, Administrator. Well, I see those as uh real tangible victories in keeping clean air, water and food. So, thank you very much for what you're doing.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I yield.

Thank you. Mr. Laura?

Thank you very much, uh, Mr. Chairman. I just wanna make one point, cuz I'm a strong believer in science and research, but it's my understanding that, um, under the, uh, the Trump administration, the agency has shed twenty percent of its staff. either wiped out or deeply slashed several programs, including the Office of Research and Development. I'm interested in the same way Miss Pingree is, is about I - I'm - I mean quite frankly, you know, I thrive on research, biomedical research or any kind of research. I - I - I find it that this is not an administration that places a lot of uh eggs in that research basket and that they - they don't have a problem with with cutting that back and it would appear that that twenty percent cut in staff, yes, would be interesting to know about the um the scientists uh et cetera and and what direction they tell us we should be going in. Uh, climate change. Uh, real, happening all around us. Uh, uh, that is, that's a quote by the way, climate change is real and happening all around us. That is directly from EPA's website. Uh, uh, I I imagine my shock when I learned that it hasn't been scrubbed from the website, although I fully expect to check in about a week and maybe it will be taken down. I guess we'll see whether or not that's the case. I'm shocked because the science tells us that climate change is real and accelerating. Um, uh, and, uh, uh, uh, really the - the effects and the impact of climate change are real. I don't know, you - you probably did see the r- report on Antarctica and the glaciers and melting and all this was an extraordinary documentary, um, over this past weekend. Um, uh, this is administration that has hell-bent my view on ignoring science. Just two weeks ago, you reportedly attended a climate deniers conference. And in your remarks you said, quote, "For those who wanted to criticize my appearance here before this group, it really shows the desperation of just how many walls have collapsed of this last line of defense." End quote. Uh, in Connecticut, we have seen increasing heat waves, extreme precipitation, devastating floods, impacting ev- everything, far- farming, school closures, damaging homes and businesses. Climate change is harming our health and our environment, but is also harming Americans' uh f- uh uh financially. This administration, however, is running the playbook on making the problem worse. focusing on policies that are handouts to the fossil fuel companies, like reversing the two thousand nine greenhouse gas endangerment finding, rolling back fuel emission standards for motor vehicles, and reducing methane leak monitoring requirements. The budget proposal reads like a climate change denier's manifesto. When climate ch- changes flooding our streets, poisoning our air, driving up health care and disaster costs, how can the EPA justify abandoning that duty to protect Americans, to appease polluters under the false flag of economic growth?